1. education

From the
Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper, Danderyds sjukhus (KI DS)
Karolinska Institutet
STUDENT OUTCOMES, LEARNING ENVIRONMENT,
QUALITY OF CARE AND PATIENT SAFETY
AT AN INTERPROFESSIONAL TRAINING WARD
Karin Hallin
Stockholm 2014
All previously published papers were reproduced with permission from the publisher.
Published by Karolinska Institutet.
Printed by Repro Print AB, Stockholm, Sweden
© Karin Hallin, 2014
ISBN 978-91-7549-779-2
Printed by
2014
Gårdsvägen 4, 169 70 Solna
Student outcomes, learning environment, quality of care and
patient safety at an interprofessional training ward
AKADEMISK AVHANDLING
som för avläggande av medicine doktorsexamen vid Karolinska Institutet
offentligen försvaras i Aulan, Danderyds Sjukhus
Fredagen den 12 december 2014, kl 09.00
Av
Karin Hallin
Principal Supervisor:
MD PhD Anna Kiessling
Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper
Danderyds sjukhus
Karolinska Institutet
Opponent:
Professor Gudrun Edgren
MedCUL, Medicinska fakultetens centrum för
undervisning och lärande
Lunds Universitet
Co-supervisor(s):
Professor Peter Henriksson
Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper
Danderyds sjukhus
Karolinska Institutet
Examination Board:
Docent Lena Nilsson Wikmar
NVS, Institutionen för neurbiologi, vårdvetenskap
och samhälle
Karolinska Institutet
Professor emeritus Nils Dalén
Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper
Danderyds sjukhus
Karolinska Institutet
Professor emeritus Ola Wahlström
IKE, Institutionen för klinisk och experimentell
medicin
Linköpings Universitet
MD PhD Olof Sköldenberg
Institutionen för kliniska vetenskaper
Danderyds sjukhus
Karolinska Institutet
Professor Madeleine Abrandt Dahlgren
IMH, Institutionen för medicin och hälsa
Linköpings Universitet
ABSTRACT
The overall aim was to enhance knowledge on students’ collaborative learning and patient safety of
interprofessional education (IPE) at an interprofessional training ward (IPTW). Medical, nurse, physiotherapy
and occupational therapy students and patients at the IPTW were studied.
1.1
STUDENTS
Study I: A prospective quantitative questionnaire study on 616 IPTW students evaluated whether students
perceived they had achieved interprofessional competence. Anonymous pre and post course questionnaires were
used. The response rate was 96 %. All four student groups perceived improved knowledge of the other three
professions (p =0.000000). They assessed the course had contributed to the understanding of the importance of
communication and teamwork to patient care (effect size 1.0; p =0.00002), where medical students had the
greatest gain (p = 0.00093). All student groups perceived an increased clarity of their own professional role (p =
0.00003), where occupational therapy students had the greatest gain (p = 0.000014).
Study II: A qualitative content analysis on free text answers of 333 questionnaires explored IPTW students’
perspectives on learning environment and on own development. Two themes emerged. An enriching learning
environment – a safe place with space included authentic and relevant patients, well composed and functioning
student teams, competent and supportive supervisors and adjusted ward structure to support learning. Awareness
of own development with faith in the future – from chaos to clarity included personal, professional and
interprofessional development towards a comprehensive view of practice.
1.2
PATIENTS
Study III: A quantitative questionnaire study on 102 patients treated by student teams at the IPTW compared to
85 patients treated at a regular ward. Patients’ perceptions of collaborative and communicative aspects of care
were assessed. The response rate was 82 % and 73 %. IPTW patients felt more involved in the decisions
regarding their treatment as compared to controls (p = 0.006). They were also more satisfied that their home
situation had been taken into account when preparing for discharge (p = 0.0002) as well as with given
information regarding need of help at home (p = 0.003). Finally, IPTW patients felt better informed (p = 0.02).
Study IV: A retrospective registry study on operated orthopaedic patients’ safety, by comparing readmission rates
and mortality between patients treated by student teams at the IPTW compared to patients treated in usual care.
Included cohort consisted of 5766 patients with 6274 admissions. No significant differences in either 30 or 90day readmission rates or in one-year mortality were found. Patients with student team exposure every day of
their hospital stay had an estimate of 0.89 for readmission within 90 days and of 0.68 for one-year mortality, i.e.
a tendency to a lower risk.
1.3
CONCLUSIONS
Active patient based learning by working together in a real ward context is effective to increase interprofessional
competence. When the community of practice at an IPTW provides a safe, supportive and permissive learning
environment it enables students to develop fully. With embodied understanding of practice, students obtain faith
in one self as future healthcare professionals interacting with others. If the learning environment is impaired,
however, students’ development could be halted.
Patients treated at an IPTW perceive a greater quality of care in aspects of communication and collaboration as
compared to usual care. A more structured interprofessional team-based care may be beneficial even in usual
care. We found no increased risk for orthopaedic patients - as concerns readmissions and mortality – when
exposed to student teams at an IPTW compared to usual care. The results should reassure further implementation
of IPE in authentic patient based contexts.
LIST OF SCIENTIFIC PAPERS
I. Hallin, K., Henriksson, P., Dalen, N., & Kiessling, A. (2011). Effects of
interprofessional education on patient perceived quality of care. Med Teach,
33(1), e22-26. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2011.530314.
II. Hallin, K., Kiessling, A. A safe place with space for learning enables students
to go from chaos to clarity – experiences from an interprofessional training.
(Submitted).
III. Hallin, K., Kiessling, A., Waldner, A., & Henriksson, P. (2009). Active
interprofessional education in a patient based setting increases perceived
collaborative and professional competence. Med Teach, 31(2), 151-157. doi:
10.1080/01421590802216258.
IV. Hallin, K., Gordon, M., Sköldenberg, O., Henriksson, P., Kiessling, A.
Readmissions and mortality in patients treated by interprofessional student
teams at a training ward as compared to usual care. (Manuscript).
CONTENTS
1 SVENSK SAMMANFATTNING ................................................................................. 1
Bakgrund ........................................................................................................................ 1
Studie I: Active interprofessional education in a patient based setting
increases perceived collaborative and professional competence ....................... 2
Studie II: A safe place with space for learning enables students to go from
chaos to clarity – experiences from an interprofessional training ward ............ 2
Studie III: Effects of interprofessional education on patient perceived
quality of care....................................................................................................... 3
Studie IV: Readmissions and mortality in patients treated by
interprofessional student teams at a training ward as compared to usual
care ....................................................................................................................... 3
Slutsatser ........................................................................................................................ 4
2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 5
Interprofessional education (IPE) ................................................................................. 5
Interprofessional training ward (IPTW) ....................................................................... 8
IPTW at Danderyd Hospital .......................................................................................... 8
Course and setting ................................................................................................ 8
Students ................................................................................................................ 8
Supervisors and faculty ........................................................................................ 8
Patients ................................................................................................................. 9
Intended learning outcomes ................................................................................. 9
Schedule ............................................................................................................... 9
Educational methods .......................................................................................... 10
Course evaluation ............................................................................................... 10
Theoretical frameworks ............................................................................................... 11
Rationales for this thesis .............................................................................................. 13
3 AIMS ............................................................................................................................. 14
4 METHODS AND RESULTS ....................................................................................... 15
Ethical considerations ................................................................................................. 15
Overview of the thesis .................................................................................................. 16
Study I........................................................................................................................... 18
Methods .............................................................................................................. 18
Statistical analysis .............................................................................................. 18
Results
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 21
Study II ......................................................................................................................... 22
Methods .............................................................................................................. 22
Rigour
Results
Conclusion .......................................................................................................... 26
5
6
7
8
9
10
Study III ........................................................................................................................ 27
Methods .............................................................................................................. 27
Statistical analysis .............................................................................................. 27
Results
Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 30
Study IV ........................................................................................................................ 30
Methods .............................................................................................................. 30
Statistical analysis .............................................................................................. 31
Results
Conclusion.......................................................................................................... 37
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................... 38
To develop own professional role in an interprofessional context ............................. 38
To increase knowledge and understanding of other professions’ competences......... 39
To develop communication, teamwork and a comprehensive view of practice ......... 40
The learning environment at an IPTW ........................................................................ 41
The relation between the learning environment at IPTW and students’
development ....................................................................................................... 43
Patient outcome of care at an IPTW ........................................................................... 44
To evaluate outcome of IPTW learning at different levels.......................................... 46
Methodological considerations ................................................................................... 47
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 49
IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND FURTHER RESEARCH......................... 50
Implication for practice ............................................................................................... 50
Implications for further research ................................................................................ 50
QUESTIONNAIRES .................................................................................................... 51
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................... 55
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................ 57
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CAIPE
Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education
CEW
Clinical Education Ward (indentical with IPTW and KUA)
CoP
Community of Practice
CP
Collaborative Practice
IPE
Interprofessional Education
IP
Interprofessional
IPTW
Interprofessional Training Ward (indentical with CEW and
KUA)
KUA
Kliniska utbildningsavdelning (indentical with CEW and
IPTW)
M
Medical student
N
Nurse student
O
Occupational therapy student
P
Physiotherapy student
SOLO
Structure of the Observed Learning Outcomes
VAS
Visual Analogous Scale
RW
Regular Ward implies usual care
WHO
World Health Organisation
1 SVENSK SAMMANFATTNING
BAKGRUND
Modern sjukvård blir allt mindre hierarkisk och genomförs allt mer av team bestående av
olika professioner. Denna utveckling medför förändrade krav på yrkesutövare och en
förändrad syn på olika yrkesroller. Färdigheter såsom samverkan, effektiv kommunikation
och att ta tillvara teammedlemmars olika kompetens blir allt viktigare för en god och säker
patientvård.
Klinisk utbildning inom hälso- och sjukvård syftar bland annat till att utveckla professionell
kompetens och mognad inför den kommande kliniska verksamheten. I och med att
sjukvården förändras, ökar kravet på hälso- och sjukvårds utbildningar att studenter, utöver
specifik professionsträningen, även får öva kliniskt teamsamarbete redan under
grundutbildningen.
I interprofessionell utbildning får studenter från olika professionsutbildningar möjlighet att
träna sin yrkesroll tillsammans med andra. Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional
Education (CAIPE) definierade år 2002 interprofessionell utbildning som ”tillfällen då två
eller flera professioner lär med, av och om varandra för att förbättra samarbete och kvalitet i
vården”.
På s.k. kliniska utbildningsavdelningar (KUA) bedrivs patientbaserad interprofessionell
utbildning. Den första avdelningen av detta slag startades 1996 på ortopedkliniken på
Linköpings universitetssjukhus och följdes 1998 av ortopedkliniker på universitetssjukhusen i
Stockholm. Utbildningsavdelningar har numer etablerats inom fler specialiteter och i andra
länder. Syftet med en KUA är att studenter från olika grundutbildningar lär tillsammans
genom att aktivt delta i det kliniska arbetet. Studenternas mål är att tillgodose patienternas
behov av medicinsk vård, omvårdad och rehabilitering genom att utveckla sin egen yrkesroll,
öka förståelsen av andras roller samt att öka förståelsen av god kommunikation och
samverkan för patientens bästa.
Pedagogiken i denna form av verksamhetsintegrerat lärande bygger på upplevelsebaserat
lärande där teori och praktik integreras och omsätts i professionell mognad.
KUA på Danderyds sjukhus tar emot ca 200 studenter årligen. Den 2 veckor långa kursen är
obligatorisk. Studenter från utbildningsprogrammen för läkare, sjuksköterskor,
arbetsterapeuter och fysioterapeuter samverkar i 2 team kring vården av patienterna.
Studenterna uppmuntras till att arbeta så självständigt som möjligt och de handleds av ett
team där samtliga professioner är representerade. Avdelningen har 8 vårdplatser med både
akut och planerat inlagda patienter med en bredd av ortopediska diagnoser. Många av
patienterna är äldre och lider även av andra sjukliga tillstånd som t ex hjärt-kärl sjukdom,
diabetes och undernäring. Mycket svårt sjuka patienter vårdas inte på KUA. Inte heller
patienter med demens, drogmissbruk eller komplicerande psykisk sjukdom eftersom
kommunikation är en av hörnstenarna i utbildningen.
1
Avhandlingens övergripande syfte är att få ökad kunskap om lärandet och att studera utfall av
interprofessionell utbildning på KUA både ur ett student- och ett patientperspektiv.
STUDIE I: ACTIVE INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION IN A PATIENT BASED
SETTING INCREASES PERCEIVED COLLABORATIVE AND PROFESSIONAL
COMPETENCE
Syfte: Att utvärdera om studenter på KUA upplevde att de hade uppnått lärandemålen. Fanns
det skillnader mellan utbildningsprogrammen?
Metod: Kvantitativ prospektiv enkätstudie på 616 studenter under åren 2002 - 2005. En
jämförelse gjordes mellan enkätsvar före- och efter KUA där enkät nr 1 fylldes i på
placeringens första dag och enkät nr 2 fylldes i på placeringens sista dag. Studenter hade inte
tillgång till enkät nr 1 vid ifyllandet av enkät nr 2. Enkäterna besvarades anonymt, men
studenterna angav sitt studieprogram och eget valt "bomärke" som användes för att kunna
jämföra varje enskild students svar före och efter KUA. Svarsfrekvensen var 96 %.
Resultat: Alla fyra studentgrupper upplevde ökad kunskap om andras professioner, ökad
tydlighet i egen profession och att kursen hade poängterat vikten av hur viktig god
kommunikation och lagarbete är för patientens bästa. De ansåg även att patienternas behov av
medicinsk vård, omvårdad och rehabilitering i hög grad hade uppfyllts. Alla fyra
studentgrupper skattade således en ökad interprofessionell kompetens. De största vinsterna
sågs hos läkar- och arbetsterapeutstudenter.
STUDIE II: A SAFE PLACE WITH SPACE FOR LEARNING ENABLES
STUDENTS TO GO FROM CHAOS TO CLARITY – EXPERIENCES FROM AN
INTERPROFESSIONAL TRAINING WARD
Syfte: Att utforska studenters syn på lärandemiljön på KUA och på sin egen utveckling.
Metod: Kvalitativ innehållsanalys av fritextsvar från 333 studenters enkäter under åren 2004 2011. Analysprocessen utgick från ett socialkonstruktivistiskt förhållningssätt till lärande.
Teorier såsom "community of practice", "embodied understanding of practice" och "peer
learning" användes i tolkning och diskussion av resultaten.
Resultat: Två teman identifierades. 1) An enriching learning environment – a safe place with
space (En gynnsam lärandemiljö - en säker plats med frihet) illustrerade studenters perspektiv
på lärandemiljön på KUA. Temat baserades på fyra subteman; verkliga och relevanta
patienter, väl sammansatta och välfungerande studentteam, kompetenta och stödjande
handledare och, slutligen, en anpassad struktur för att stödja lärandet. 2) Awareness of own
development with faith in the future – from chaos to clarity (Medvetenhet om egen
utveckling med framtidstro - från kaos till klarhet) illustrerade studenters perspektiv på den
egna utvecklingen. Temat baserades på två subteman; att utvecklas personligt och
professionellt samt att utvecklas interprofessionellt mot ett helhetsperspektiv på patientvård.
Det andra temat var beroende av det första temat - för att kunna gå från kaos till klarhet
krävdes interaktion i en säker och samtidigt tillåtande miljö. Resultaten antydde också att
studenters utveckling avstannade om lärandemiljön var otillräcklig.
2
STUDIE III: EFFECTS OF INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION ON PATIENT
PERCEIVED QUALITY OF CARE
Syfte: Att utvärdera patienters upplevelse av vårdkvalitet på KUA jämfört med patienter på
en traditionell ortopedavdelning med fokus på kommunikation, information och delaktighet.
Metod: Kvantitativ enkätstudie av skattningar från patienter under åren 2004-2005. Patienter
som uppfyllde kriterier för vård på KUA och som skrevs ut direkt till eget boende
inkluderades. Patienter som skrevs ut under en helg (då utskrivningen inte utfördes av
studenter) och patienter med återinläggning inom 4 veckor exkluderades. 102 patienter på
KUA och 85 patienter på kontrollavdelning inkluderades. Svarsfrekvensen var 82 resp. 73 %.
Resultat: Patienter vårdade på KUA upplevde större delaktighet i besluten om sin vård och de
kände sig bättre informerade om sin behandling jämfört med patienter vårdade på
kontrollavdelning. De ansåg även att personalen i högre grad hade tagit hänsyn till deras
hemsituation i samband med utskrivning och att de hade blivit bättre informerade om möjlig
hjälp i hemmet.
STUDIE IV: READMISSIONS AND MORTALITY IN PATIENTS TREATED BY
INTERPROFESSIONAL STUDENT TEAMS AT A TRAINING WARD AS
COMPARED TO USUAL CARE
Syfte: Att utvärdera patientsäkerheten på KUA genom att jämföra frekvensen av
återinläggning och död mellan patienter vårdade på KUA och patienter vårdade på
traditionell ortopedavdelning.
Metod: Retrospektiv registerstudie på 8054 opererade patienter som vårdats på någon av
Danderyd sjukhus ortopedavdelningar inklusive KUA under åren 2006 - 2011. Data
hämtades från Socialstyrelsens patientregister, Dödsorsaksregistret samt ortopedklinikens
register på vårdade patienter. Patienter med betydande samsjuklighet och diagnoser som inte
var lämpliga för vård på KUA exkluderades. Patienter som vårdats < 2 dygn och eller > 2
veckor och patienter vårdade under semesterperioder (jul och sommar) exkluderades också.
Studerade utfallsmått var återinläggningsfrekvens inom 30 och 90 dagar respektive död inom
1 år från utskrivningsdatum.
Resultat: Inkluderad kohort bestod av 5766 patienter med 6274 inläggningar. 58 % av
patienterna var kvinnor med en medianålder på 63 år och en medianvårdtid på 4 dagar. Vi
fann ingen skillnad i 30 och 90 dagars återinläggningsfrekvens eller död inom 1 år mellan
patienter som vårdats av interprofessionella studentteam på KUA jämfört med patienter som
vårdats på någon av de övriga ortopedavdelningarna. Slutsatsen kvarstod efter regressionsoch känslighetsanalys och efter justering för förvillande data (confounders).
3
SLUTSATSER
¥ Att lära genom att arbeta tillsammans i vården av patienter är ett effektivt sätt att lära
sig att samverka över professionsgränserna och att öka sin professionella och
interprofessionella kompetens.
¥
Om lärandemiljön är säker, stödjande och tillåtande, görs det möjligt för studenter att
mogna personligt, professionellt och interprofessionellt.
¥
I en gynnsam lärandemiljö får studenter tilltro till sig själva, sitt framtida yrke och till
sitt framtida samarbete inom vården. I en otillräcklig lärandemiljö kan studenters
utveckling bromsas.
¥
Patienter som vårdas av interprofessionella studentteam upplever en hög vårdkvalitet
gällande samarbets- och kommunikationsaspekter. Traditionell patientvård bör
gynnas av att vården i större utsträckning bedrivs av strukturerade interprofessionella
team.
¥
Det finns ingen ökad medicinsk risk vad beträffar återinläggning inom 30- och 90
dagar samt död inom 1 år efter utskrivning mellan patienter vårdade av handledda
interprofessionella studentteam på en utbildningsavdelning jämfört med patienter
vårdade av utbildad hälso- och sjukvårdspersonal på traditionell avdelning.
¥
En fortsatt utveckling av interprofessionell undervisning i autentiska patientbaserade
utbildningsmiljöer bör uppmuntras både ur student- och patientsynpunkt.
4
2 INTRODUCTION
This thesis focuses on students’ learning and outcome of interprofessional education and on
patients’ quality of care and safety at an interprofessional training ward compared to usual
care. The introductory chapter aims to present some useful terminology and to highlight
important aspects of this rapidly and worldwide expanding area of knowledge.
INTERPROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (IPE)
Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education (CAIPE), an independent charity,
founded in 1987, has defined IPE as: when two or more professions learn with, from and
about each other in order to improve collaboration and the quality of practice (CAIPE,
2002).
The ideas of interprofessional education dates back to the 1960s and has since then been
reinforced through several World Health Organization (WHO) reports, for instants; Learning
together to work together for health (WHO 1988) and Framework for Action on
Interprofessional Education and Collaborative Practice (WHO, 2010).
The terminology has varied over the years and may still give rise to confusion – e.g.
multiprofessional-, interprofessional-, interdisciplinary education, etc. Many times the
meaning of the terms is the same but sometimes it is not. A situation where several
professions are present at the same time and context but their learning occurs in parallel to
each other – then it is not interprofessional education. The CAIPE definition is a precise and
complete description of IPE and should be used when one means an educational process
where students or practitioners from various health professions learn together - with, from
and about each other – with the goal of collaborating in providing health care. In some
reports, the goals of the IPE initiatives seem to go beyond communication and role
understanding, and suggest changing the culture of health professional interaction, referred to
as flattening hierarchies (Herbert, 2005).
Several international organisations have over the years formulated statements on the relation
between IPE and collaborative practice. Some of these are stated in Figure 1 below.
5
Improve
Improve
health
health
outcomes
outcomes!
Become
Becomeaware
awareofof
limitations
limitationsand
and
strengths
strengthsofofown
own
profession
profession!
Improve
Improve
patient
patient
safety
safety!
AAneed
need in
in
complex
complex
health
health
systems
systems!
!
Learn
Learnabout
about
the
thework
workof
of
others
others!
Foster
Foster
mutual
mutual
respect
respect!
Strengthen
Strengthen
health
health
systems
systems !
Eliminate
Eliminate
harmful
harmful
stereotypes
stereotypes!
Become
Becomeaware
awareofof
misconceptions
misconceptions
between
between
professions
professions!
Evoke
Evoke
patientpatientcentred
centred
practice
practice!
Mitigate
Mitigatethe
the
global
globalhealth
health
workforce
workforce
crisis
crisis!
A culture shift
A culture shift
inineducation
education
and medicine
and medicine!
Optimize
Optimize
skills
skillsofofteam
team
members
members !
Move
Movefrom
from
fragmentation
fragmentationtoto
aaposition
positionofof
strength
strength!
Raised
Raised
staff
staff
morale
morale!
Improved
Improved
workplace
workplace
productivity
productivity!
Overcome
Overcome
barriers to
barriers to
collaboration
collaboration!
Figure 1. Frequently used statements on interprofessional education - collaborative
practice formulated by different influential organisations
AIPPEN Australasian Interprofessional Practice and Education Network
AMEE The Association for Medical Education in Europe,
CAIPE Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education
CIHC Canadian Interprofessional Health Collaborative
EMSA European Medical Students' Association
EIPEN European Interprofessional Education Network
HPGN Health Professionals Global Network (WHO)
IAMSE International Association of Medical Science Educators
IFMSA International Federation of Medical Students' Associations
NaHSSA National Health Sciences Students’ Association in Canada
NIPNet Nordic Interprofessional Network
The Network: TUFH The Network: Towards Unity For Health
WFME World Federation for Medical Education
WHO World Health Organization
COLLABORATIVE PRACTICE
Working in teams crossing professional boundaries is a matter of increasing importance in the
delivery of healthcare. For patients it is, more or less, taken for granted that their care is run
by smoothly operating teams, in which team members, despite professional affiliation, agree
upon a conjoined strategy concerning their care. Health care institutions of today agree upon
the importance of collaborative competence to secure patient safety in analogy with the
landmark report of the Institute of Medicine (USA) (Institute of Medicine, 2001). However,
deficiencies in collaboration is still an important contributing factor to adverse events in
healthcare (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2013), and verbal communication
6
errors between staff members cause or contribute to a substantial amount of severe patient
safety incidents (Rabol et al., 2011).
In accordance with the World Health Organization, interprofessional education is a necessary
step in preparing a “collaborative practice-ready” health workforce that is better prepared to
respond to local health needs (WHO, 2010). A collaborative practice-ready health worker is
someone who has learned how to work in an interprofessional team and is competent to do
so. Despite that many health workers already practice in teams and actively communicate, in
collaborative practice, cooperation has taken one step further. These health workers know
how to collaborate with colleagues from other professions with complementary skills and
they do so with respect of one another. They interact to create a shared understanding that
they would not have come to on their own. According to the WHO, it is important to
introduce interprofessional education and collaborative practice as strategies that can
transform the health system. It is no longer enough for health workers to be professional.
Figure 2 is inspired by the WHO (WHO, 2010) and illustrates the pathway between
interprofessional education and collaborative practice.
!
!
"#$%&'&(!)*(#)+#%!)*!,*%-!)*(#)+#%!.*%!/#0#%!+#$1)+
!
-
>$+,#8"$$/)!"#$%&%'($))*'"+,./01+2'"6%$)$"#-?(0#0%$;'%<-('%1$--
3',,+4'%+25$&%+121$9
%$+/:-;'%<('%1$--
3',,+4'%+25$6%+121$-
!7&%'5$/8$+,#8'0#1'7$=&27+,8$+,#8)$%5*1$-
Figure 2. The relation between IPE and collaborative practice. Inspired by the WHO
(WHO, 2010).
7
INTERPROFESSIONAL TRAINING WARD (IPTW)
An IPTW is a student-adapted arena for interprofessional workplace learning. There is no
golden standard terminology and the phenomenon is also named e.g. clinical education ward
(CEW), student training ward, training unit etc. If the context is an authentic clinical
environment and the student training is based on the definitions of interprofessional
education, the different terms probably have a substantially equal meaning.
IPTWs were launched in Sweden 1996 and have since then been introduced in several
countries. It has been showed that IPTW is an effective means for students to practice
collaborative skills and to develop professional and interprofessional competences. (Brewer
& Stewart-Wynne, 2013), (Hallin, Kiessling, Waldner, & Henriksson, 2009), (Jacobsen,
Fink, Marcussen, Larsen, & Hansen, 2009), (Wilhelmsson et al., 2009), (Ponzer et al., 2004),
(Reeves & Freeth, 2002), (Hilton & Morris, 2001), (Wahlstrom, Sanden, & Hammar, 1997),
IPTW AT DANDERYD HOSPITAL
Course and setting
The IPTW course is a two-week mandatory IPE course at the Karolinska Institutet,
Stockholm, Sweden. The IPTW at Danderyd University Hospital, Stockholm, is one out of
four wards at the Department of Orthopaedics. The ward has run since 1998 and hosts two
hundred undergraduate students yearly. It has 8 patient beds, 1 office for e.g. computer work,
hospital records and documentation and 1 conference room for e.g. rounds and reflections.
The ward is the setting of all studies included in this thesis.
Students
The IPTW course is designed for medical students in their surgical semester (eighth out of
eleven) and for nursing, occupational and physiotherapy students in their last semester before
graduation (sixth). Before the course, students have passed a substantial amount of theoretical
studies and a varied amount of uniprofessional workplace clerkships. Students are divided
into two teams, each consisting of 1–2 medical students, 3–4 nursing students, 1 occupational
therapy student and 1 physiotherapy student. If a student team is short of a profession, the
supervisor of the missing profession acts as a role model within the team.
Supervisors and faculty
During the two-week course, the interprofessional team of supervisors consists of five to six
nurses, one orthopaedic surgeon, one occupational therapist and one physiotherapist. At least
one professional nurse is always present at the ward, where the other three professions also
hold part time duties out of the ward but are available when needed. Moreover, one auxiliary
nurse is available to help and guide the students with the basic patient care.
An interprofessional faculty team representing the four professions is responsible for course
evaluation and development and for staff support. They also participate in the course
introductory and closing seminars.
8
Patients
Patients are both acute and elective and are randomly admitted to the IPTW or to one of the
other wards within the department depending on available patient beds and on the different
profiles of the wards. Patients have the option to not be treated at the IPTW, but very few
choose not to. A majority of the patients are elderly and suffer from a wide range of
orthopaedic diagnoses. Many patients also present complicating comorbidities e.g.
cardiovascular diseases, diabetes and malnutrition. Patients with dementia, psychosis, drugor alcohol abuse or patients with medically very demanding conditions (multi-trauma,
contagious disease or moribund) are not eligible to be treated at the IPTW.
Intended learning outcomes
Students’ intended learning outcomes are both interprofessional (shared by all student
groups) and profession specific. The interprofessional intended learning outcomes are:
¥
¥
¥
¥
¥
Provide the patient independently, under supervision, with good medical care, nursing
and rehabilitation
Increase knowledge and understanding of own professional role
Increase knowledge and understanding of other professions’ competences
Develop comprehension of communication and teamwork
Increase understanding of ethical awareness.
Examples of profession specific goals are:
¥
¥
¥
¥
Examine patients, set diagnoses, suggest investigations and treatments, write referrals,
manage medication, organize and lead rounds (medical students)
Lead, prioritize, distribute and carry out care tasks, give and document medication,
surgery wound care (nurse students)
Investigate and carry out patients’ need for occupational therapy in the care, at home, at
work and at recreational time (occupational therapy student)
Investigate and carry out patients’ need for physiotherapy in the care, at home, at work
and at recreational time (physiotherapy student)
Schedule
The course starts with an introduction, followed by eight days of practice. Students are
divided into two teams who alternate daytime and evening shifts. A day shift starts with
handover from regular night staff to the student team. A structured team conference is held
where patient issues and goals are discussed and planned and followed up by a patient round.
Hereinafter follows different tasks to secure patients’ medical care and rehabilitation
executed by the whole student team, parts of the team or by singular students depending on
the task. Both teams are present during mid-day with enough handover time from day shift to
evening shift. Most day shifts end with a scheduled reflective session. To facilitate patient
continuity, the student team present at the evening shift return on the following day shift. All
actions by students are supervised.
9
During daytime shifts all students have access to a supervisor of their own profession, while
one or two nurses supervise the entire student team during evening shifts. In need of further
medical help during evenings, the orthopaedic surgeon on call is available. During shifts
without students (i.e. nights, weekends and student holidays) the regular orthopaedic staff
manages the ward.
The course ends with a closing seminar where the students, supervisors and course faculty are
present. Students have beforehand prepared written and oral reflections of their learning and
achieved goals as a base for the discussion at the seminar. The students also fill out an
evaluating questionnaire.
Educational methods
The workplace learning at the IPTW is based on the pedagogy of experiential learning (Kolb
1984), and on experience-based learning (Dornan, Boshuizen, King, & Scherpbier, 2007),
where theory and practice are integrated. Students learn by observing, doing, evaluating and
reflecting. The overall educational strategy has a collaborative student-activating approach. It
is based on the CAIPE definition of IPE (CAIPE, 2002); when students of two or more
professions learn about, from and with each other to enable effective collaboration and
improve health outcomes. At the IPTW, the student teams collaborate to treat, care for and
rehabilitate the patients.
In the beginning of the course, students need more guidance and support and the supervisors
act as role models in the team. Gradually, supervisors step back ‘with their hands on the
back’ to support students’ independent problem-solving skills, to let them take more active
part in the care and to give them a realistic impression of the responsibilities of qualified
professionals. Consequently and eventually, it is mainly the students who communicate with
the patients, with patients’ relatives and with professionals engaged in the care of patients.
Likewise, it is mainly the students who provide the direct patient care at the IPTW.
Peer learning (Topping & Ehly, 1998), (Ladyshewsky, 2006) is consistently used in the
collaborative teamwork.
Scheduled reflective sessions and the closing seminar support students’ reflective skills and
their deep learning.
Course evaluation
Recurrent meetings with supervisors and faculty, oral evaluations with students at the closing
seminar and recurrent student questionnaires support a continuous evaluation and
development of the course.
10
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS
Several frameworks build the theoretical base of this thesis. They are often intertwined and
partly overlapping. The frames of most significance for learning at an IPTW are presented
here.
Kolbs experiential learning theory of 1984 offered at that time a new way of looking at
learning compared to traditional educational methods, which were mostly based on rational
idealist epistemology. The theory describes a holistic integrative perspective on learning that
combines experience, perception, cognition and behaviour. Learners, if they are to be
effective, need four different kinds of abilities: concrete experience (CE), reflective
observation (RO), abstract conceptualization (AC) and active experimentation (AE).
Learning requires abilities that are polar opposites, and a learner must continually choose
which set of learning abilities is best fitted to a specific situation. In the process of learning,
one moves in varying degrees from actor to observer, and from specific involvement to
general analytic detachment. The theory is often illustrated as an experiential learning cycle
(Kolb 1984).
According to Bleakley, the most commonly used learning theories in medical education still
focus on the individual student rather than on the socio-cultural context (Bleakley, Bligh, &
Browne, 2011). In IPE literature there is a common request for frameworks applicable to
students’ participatory learning in the context of a collaborative health care practice (Barr,
2013), (D'Amour, Ferrada-Videla, San Martin Rodriguez, & Beaulieu, 2005), (Thistlethwaite,
2012).
The social constructivism perspective implies that knowledge is constructed through
interaction and reality is based on multiple, imperceptible mental constructions, socially
grounded and context specific, and also dependent on individuals or groups holding the
construction (Guba & Lincoln, 1994). In this thesis a perspective of social constructivism is
chosen as students perform professionally relevant actions, interact with others and reflect
both in and about. The perspective matches well with the ideas of IPE in the socio-cultural
context of an IPTW.
A prerequisite of all IPE in contrast to uniprofessional education is that there are always
several students learning together i.e. peers are always present to interact with. Peer learning
is defined as a method whereby individuals with equal status actively help and support each
other in learning tasks (Topping & Ehly, 1998). Learning is a social process that can be
enhanced by involving peers. Sharing of a patient is one good way to ensure that students
have a successful collaborative peer learning experience (Ladyshewsky, 2006). Peer learning
is consistently used at the ITPW in the collaborative teamwork.
A key issue in IPTW learning is to support professional competence development. Several
theories and concept have been stated to understand this complex process. In 1986 Dreyfus
and Dreyfus presented the novice to expert development, a five-staged model of adult
professional skill acquisition as a critique of the view on human skill development as a
11
cognitive learning process with explicit rules to follow in order to perform a task (Dreyfus,
Dreyfus, & Athanasiou, 1986). In the model the learner moves from reliance on abstract rules
to use concrete experience, shifts from reliance on rule-based thinking to intuition, changes in
perception of the situation viewed as compilation of equally relevant bits to an increasingly
complex whole and the learner passes from detached observer to involvement. The five
stages for the learner to pass are: novice, advanced beginner, competence, proficiency and
expertise. The stage model has e.g. been applied to describe the development of nurse
competence going from beginners to experts (Benner, Tanner, & Chesla, 1992).
Dall´Alba and Sandberg developed the concept from a one-dimensional adult skill acquisition
into a two-dimensional model of professional development. A horizontal dimension that
represents skill development with increasing professional experience and a vertical dimension
that represents development of an embodied understanding of practice in a given context.
Embodied understanding integrates knowing, acting and being, i. e. learning knowledge and
skills become integrated into a “professional way-of-being” (e.g. “being a doctor”).
(Dall'Alba & Sandberg, 2006).
Learning that takes place in authentic clinical contexts is called workplace-, experiencebased- or situated learning. This learning is of great importance to health care students as
the workplace is where competence is eventually applied. The learning at the IPTW uses the
pedagogy of workplace learning where theory and practice are integrated.
According to Dornan, the experience-based learning at a workplace is a process of absorbing
and being absorbed into the culture of the workplace. The core process of clinical workplace
learning involves ‘participation in practice’, which evolves along a spectrum from passive
observation to performance. Students quickly become bored if they remain as passive
observers, contrasting to the more actively and closer they are involved to care for patients,
the more highly they value it. The core condition for clinical workplace learning is ‘supported
participation’, where outcome is dependent on supervisors’ attitudes, support and challenge
(Dornan et al., 2007). When a workplace allows students to be active participants in clinical
work instead of a passive listeners or readers, students’ learning is effective (O’Brien et al.
2001).
Workplace learning may be challenging to students, as they have to identify and attach
relevant theoretical knowledge into practice, and at the same time try to be accepted and get a
sense of belonging at the workplace. Different workplaces have different cultures – meaning
professionals’ attitudes and values, how they mutually tackle and resolve tasks, how
professionals interact and communicate and how they understand and learn from each other.
This culture is often named a community of practice.
Lave and Wenger defined community of practice (CoP) in 1991 as a group of people who
share a common interest and a desire to deepen their knowledge by interacting (Lave &
Wenger, 1991). They stated that most of the learning occurs in social relationships at the
workplace rather than in a classroom setting, a concept known as 'situated learning'. To
12
participate in the day-to-day activities of a CoP is an important part of learning. The concept
was developed 1998 and described as an entity bounded by three interrelated dimensions;
mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoire (Wenger, 1998). In 2002, Wenger
et al revised the three characteristics of CoP and named them domain, community, and
practice (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002). CoP is still an evolving concept and there is
no consensus on what a true CoP is. Li et al recommend to focus on optimizing three specific
characteristics of the concept; support for members to interact with each other, emphasize on
learning and sharing knowledge and building a sense of belonging within groups (Li et al.,
2009).
RATIONALES FOR THIS THESIS
It is a big commitment to initiate and manage an interprofessional patient based workplace
course as an IPTW course – both to the responsible university programmes and faculty as
well as to supervisors and hospitals implementing the training. As their efforts involve a dual
great responsibility towards both students and patients, it is important to study the effects of
an IPTW course from both perspectives.
When investigating the effect on students, a primary focus is to study whether students reach
their intended learning outcomes in this specific context and to what degree their knowledge
and understanding changes over time. It is also important to study whether there are any
differences between students belonging to different educational programmes.
In IPE research there is a request to focus on the socio-cultural context (Bleakley et al.,
2011), (Barr, 2013), (D'Amour et al., 2005), (Thistlethwaite, 2012). To further explore and
better understand how and why students reach, or fail to reach, intended learning outcomes
this thesis focuses on important characteristics in the learning environment and in students’
development.
The final aim of interprofessional education is to improve the care of patients. Studies on
patients’ outcome on IPE are scarce and it is an important field of research (Barr, Freeth,
Hammick, Koppel, & Reeves, 2006), (Reeves et al., 2008), (WHO, 2010). This thesis focuses
on communicative and collaborative aspects of care - areas where students are highly
involved in the patient care and therefore might have a great impact.
As an increased number of patients are treated at a rising number of IPTWs, it is of great
importance to also study aspects of patient safety. To our knowledge, this has not been done
before, using objective and robust outcome measurements.
13
3 AIMS
The overall aim was to enhance knowledge on students’ collaborative learning and patients’
quality of care and safety related to interprofessional education (IPE) at an interprofessional
training ward (IPTW).
¥
To evaluate whether students perceived they had achieved interprofessional
competence after participating in patient-based teamwork training during an IPTW
course
¥
To explore how environmental characteristics impact students learning at an IPTW,
and the characteristics of students’ development in this context
¥
To assess the patients’ perceptions of collaborative and communicative aspects of
care when treated at an IPTW as compared to usual care
¥
To assess patient safety of an IPTW by comparing readmission rates and mortality
between patients treated by student teams at the ITPW and patients treated in usual
care
14
4 METHODS AND RESULTS
ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
In both study I and II, all participating students voluntarily answered the regular course
questionnaire used to evaluate the course. The questions were answered anonymously and
students were informed that the answers were to be analysed at group level with no
possibility to identify the answers of a particular individual.
In study III participating patients answered voluntarily a sample of questions from a validated
survey routinely used at the hospital to evaluate patients’ satisfaction with care. Patient data
such as age, length of hospital stage, diagnosis etc were retrieved from patient records by the
first author. These data was kept in secured files by the first author. Patients were informed
that the answers were to be analysed at group level with no possibility to identify the answers
of a particular individual
In study IV the register data was achieved from the National Board of Health and Welfare.
Ward information for each patient was retrieved through the hospital information system. All
personal identification numbers was replaced by serial numbers and it was not possible to
track data to a specific patient. The data was kept in secured files and only accessible to three
of the authors. No journal records were studied and there was no need for informed consent
from patients.
All investigations conforms to the principles outlined in the ‘Declaration of Helsinki; 1964’.
The Regional Ethical Review Board in Stockholm, Sweden, approved all included studies.
15
OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS
A summary of the four studies included in this thesis is shown in table 1.
Table 1: Overview of included studies
Study 1
Study 2
Student objectives
Learning
environment and
student
development
Patient quality of
care
Patient safety
Main aim Do students
perceive they
achieve
interprofessional
competence?
What
characterizes the
learning
environment and
students’
perceived
development?
What are patients’
perceptions of
collaborative and
communicative
aspects of care at
IPTW compared to
usual care?
Are there any
differences in
readmission rates
and mortality in
IPTW patients
compared to
usual care?
Design
Prospective
comparative
before and after
Prospective
descriptive
Prospective
comparative by
group design.
Retrospective
registry cohort
comparative
Data
collection
Quantitative
Qualitative
Questionnaire data Free text
questionnaire
data
Quantitative
Questionnaire data
Quantitative
Registry data
Study
period
2002 - 2005
2004 - 2011
2004 - 2005
2006 – 2011
Study 2
Study 3
Focus
Study 1
16
Study 3
Study 4
Study 4
Participants Medical, nurse,
Medical, nurse, Patients at the
Patients at the
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
physiotherapy
physiotherapy
IPTW and at a
IPTW and 3
and occupational and
comparable ward other wards at
Participants Medical, nurse,
Medical, nurse, Patients at the
Patients at the
therapy students
occupational
without student
the department of
physiotherapy
physiotherapy
IPTW and at a
IPTW and 3
therapy students teams
orthopaedics
16
and occupational and
comparable ward other wards at
therapy students
occupational
without student
the department of
616
333
102 IPTW
8054 population
Number of
therapy students teams
orthopaedics
participants
85 controls
5766 cohort
616
333
102 IPTW
8054 population
Number of
participants
85 controls
5766 cohort
96% before
82% (n 84) IPTW
Response
rate
97% after
73% (n 62)
96% before
82%controls
(n 84) IPTW
Response
rate
97% after
73% (n 62)
949 students
5912 patients in total
Studied
controls
individuals
1192 IPTW patients
in total
949 students
5912 patients in total
Studied
individuals
1192 IPTW patients
Observational.
Data
Analyses of
Explorative
Descriptive
in total
analysis
variance
content analysis comparative
Poisson
statistics.
Observational.
Data
Analyses
of
Explorative
Descriptive
(ANOVA) with
regression.
Nonparametric
analysis
variance
up to two within-content analysis comparative
and Chi-square Poisson
Cameron and
statistics.
subject factors
analyses.
(ANOVA) with
regression.
Trivedi’s test
Nonparametric
and contrasts.
up to two withinandCronbach
Chi-square
Descriptive
alpha
Fisher’s exact
subject factors
analyses.
statistics
for internal
test.
and contrasts.
consistency.
Descriptive
Cronbach alpha
CoxCox
proportional
proportional
statistics
for internal
hazards
hazards
consistency.
regression.
regression.
Grambsch and
Therneau’s test.
17
17
STUDY I
Methods
The study was based on data from student questionnaires during the period 2002 - 2005. The
”post IPTW” questionnaire was, during the time of the study, in use by all four university
hospitals in Stockholm to evaluate IPE. It was considered to have high face validity and
students perceived it was easy to understand and to fill out. Selection of items and validity
has been described elsewhere (Ponzer et al., 2004). We introduced a ”pre IPTW”
questionnaire in order to assess achieved competence as change over time. The ”pre IPTW”
questionnaire was answered at the introduction on the first day at the IPTW. The ”post
IPTW” questionnaire was answered at the closing seminar on the last day. The questions
were answered anonymously and marked with an individual code, chosen by the student, in
order to match pre and post IPTW questionnaires. The educational program, academic
semester and sex were noted. An unnumbered visual analogous scale (VAS) (Bowling 1997)
was used. Students answered each item by placing an X on a 10-centimeter scale with verbal
‘anchors’ expressing the extremes. The score for each item was obtained by measuring from
the left anchor to the X mark with an accuracy of 0.1 cm.
Statistical analysis
Pre IPTW results were compared to post IPTW. Analyses of variance (ANOVA) with up to
two within-subject factors and contrasts were used. The power analysis showed that with 590
students in each group, we had more than 90 % power to detect a 10 % change between pre
and post IPTW evaluations at a two sided alpha of 0.05. The descriptive data for the VAS
measurements are given as means and 95 % confidence intervals. The results were considered
significant at p < 0.05. All analyses were performed with the STATISTICA Stat Soft, Inc 7.0
package.
Results
616 students participated in the course at the IPTW during the evaluation period 2002 – 2005.
175 were medical students, 290 nurse students, 83 physiotherapy students and 66
occupational therapy students. 34 % of the medical students were male, in the other three
groups a majority were female (87 - 95 %). The response rates of the pre and post IPTW
questionnaires were 96 % and 97 % respectively.
18
Knowledge of other professions’ work
As shown in figure 3, all student groups perceived a significant gain in knowledge of all other
professions (p = 0.000000). For nursing and medical students the most prominent gain was of
physiotherapy and occupational therapy. For physiotherapy students the significant increase
in perceived knowledge showed no difference between the three professions. The
occupational therapy students’ gain in perceived knowledge of the medical and nursing
professions were significantly higher than that of the physiotherapy profession.
Medical students knowledge of
other professions work
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Nursing
PT
OT
Nurs e stud ents know ledg e of
other professions work
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Physiotherapist students knowledge of
other professions work
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Medical
Nursing
OT
Medical
PT
OT
Occupatitonal therapist students knowledge of
other professions work
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Medical
Nursing
PT
Figure 3. Knowledge of the other three professions’ work before and after interprofessional education at
the IPTW. Medical denotes the medical profession. Nursing denotes the nurse profession. PT denotes the
physiotherapy profession. OT denotes the occupational therapy profession. 0 denotes superficial knowledge and
10 denotes deep knowledge. Black bars represent results before IPTW. Means and 95% confidence intervals are
indicated.
19
Perspective of own professional role
Students’ perception of clarity of their own professional role increased significantly among
all student groups (p = 0.00003). Occupational therapy students had the greatest gain in
clarity (p = 0.000014) and had a significantly lower clarity in the pre IPTW questionnaire
compared to the others. This difference disappeared after the IPTW. Figure 4 illustrates the
perspectives on own role before and after IPTW.
10
9
8
7
6
Before CEW
After CEW
p=0.00003
5
4
3
2
1
0
Medical
Nurse
PT
OT
Figure 4. Perspective of own professional role before and after interprofessional education at the IPTW.
PT denotes physiotherapy students. OT denotes occupational therapy students. 0 denotes Unclear and 10 denotes
Clear. Means and 95% confidence intervals are indicated
20
Practice and comprehension of communication and teamwork
All student groups assessed that the IPTW course had contributed considerably to their
understanding of the importance of communication and teamwork in patient care (1.00; p =
0.00002). Before IPTW, the medical students had significantly lower ratings of how their
clinical education, so far, had contributed to this understanding, compared to the other student
groups. This difference diminished after IPTW and the medical students had the greatest gain
compared to the other student groups (p = 0.00093). Figure 5 illustrates IPTW contribution in
communication and teamwork.
10
9
8
7
6
Before CEW
After CEW
p=0.00002
5
4
3
2
1
0
Medical
Nurse
PT
OT
Figure 5. Practice and comprehension of communication and teamwork for good patient care. Students
rated to what extent their clinical education before and during the IPTW course had contributed to this
knowledge. PT denotes physiotherapy students. OT denotes occupational therapy students. 0 denotes Small
extent and 10 denotes Large extent. Over all effect size was 1.00. Means and 95% confidence intervals are
marked.
Other aspects of IPE
All students had high ratings on the importance of communication and teamwork for good
patient care both before [9.32 (9.22–9.43)] and after IPTW [9.41(9.32–9.50) ns]. As expected
all student groups had high ratings on the importance of professional competence to good
patient care already before IPTW [9.04 (8.83–9.25)]. A small increase was found after IPTW
[9.32 (9.16–9.50); p = 0.0044]. All student groups perceived that the patients’ need of
medical care, nursing and rehabilitation were met at the ward. The physiotherapy students
had a slightly lower rating with a mean of 7.9 (p =0.0017) compared to the other student
groups who varied between8.3–8.6. Furthermore, all student groups perceived that the
teamwork at the IPTW had met patient needs [8.65 (8.47–8.83)].
Conclusion
Active patient based learning by working together in a real ward context seemed to be an
effective means to increase collaborative and professional competence.
21
STUDY II
Methods
This qualitative study was based on interpretation of students’ free text answers to the broad
question: ”What is your general opinion of your learning experiences on the clinical training
at the IPTW? The study was guided by a constructivist theory of learning. The questionnaire
was answered at the closing seminar on the last day at the IPTW. The questions were
answered anonymously with a notation of educational program, course date and sex. The
study period was between the years 2004 to 2011. Due to the great amount of answers, the
sample size was limited by including answers from a random sample of student semesters
until saturation was reached. Finally, free-text answers from 333 students, representing all
four professions from four semesters (fall 2004, spring 2006, fall 2006 and spring 2011),
were included. Medical students were equally males and females. The other student
categories were almost all female.
The free text answers were analysed by qualitative content analysis inspired by Graneheim
and Lundman (Graneheim & Lundman, 2004). Data was grouped by their content. Meaning
units were identified that focused on student’s learning. Each meaning unit was given a code
that described the content. Meaning units and codes were grouped into themes (expressions
of latent content; interpretation of the text).
Rigour
Students answered the questionnaires on the last day of the course and, therefore, at a time
when the subject was of current interest to them, contributing to trustworthiness. The role of
the first author during the data collection period was to supervise the medical students and to
be medically responsible for the patients at the IPTW. The second author’s role was more
external with expertise in medical education research with special focus on IPE. Both authors
are therefore, knowledgeable on IPE in general and on the studied IPTW in particular. As the
first author has been practically involved with the students at the ward, there might be a risk
to consider own assumptions while interpreting the text. On the other hand, time has past
between being a supervisor and performing the data analysis, making it easier to look at the
written text more objectively. Moreover, the second author contributed with an overview
perspective during the process. Both authors conducted all steps in the process. The codes,
categories and themes were discussed from different perspectives until consensus was
reached. Representative quotes were selected to illustrate the results and to gain credibility.
Care was taken to ensure accurate translation from Swedish to English by using a
professional translator.
Results
Two themes conceptualised students’ perspectives on their learning environment an enriching
interprofessional learning environment – a safe place with space, and on their own
development awareness of own development with faith in the future – from chaos to clarity.
22
The second theme was dependent on the first theme. Themes, subthemes and categories are
presented in Table 2.
An enriching interprofessional learning environment – a safe place with space:
Authentic and relevant patients
Students described the inspiration and the positive challenge of finally taking care of
authentic patients. They were eager to use their knowledge and skills in practice and through
patient interaction gather clinical experience. The number of patients was important as well
as patients’ disease severity and level of basic care was appropriate to the student team.
Well composed and functioning student teams
Students described it was fun, safe and instructive to belong to a team with other students.
They felt safe to communicate and collaborate being among peers. The opinion and
knowledge of everyone was equally valued. Consequently, students’ learning was inspired.
It was important that the student team was complete. A team missing a student profession felt
incomplete even though a supervisor covered up professionally. Likewise, a team with too
many nurse students was criticized as valuable opportunity for each nurse student to practice
their role was decreased and, in addition, nurse related issues was at risk to take precedence at
the expense of the interests of others.
Competent and supportive supervisors
‘To be allowed’ was greatly appreciated. Supervisors’ supportive and permissive attitude
enabled students to take responsibility and to act independently. Learning was facilitated as
students got enough time and patience from supervisors to develop their skills, to seek
knowledge and to interact with patients and team members. Other valued supervising
qualities were to instruct when needed, encourage and give feedback. Students appraised the
safe culture, created by pedagogically and clinically experienced supervisors who were either
present or readily available. The whole student team appreciated the always present nurse
supervisors but nurse students could express uncertainty, when they perceived a shortage of
supervising nurses at evenings. There were comments on insufficient presence of the
physician supervisor. Physician attendance during morning rounds and when needed during
the day, as well as being easily available at all times, was important. Criticism was also
expressed towards substituting supervisor as students sensed a lack of enthusiasm to work at
the ward or a lack of IPTW experience.
Adjusted ward structure to support learning
A thorough introduction to the course and to the ward was important, in order to lessen the
initial feelings of uncertainty. Nurse students also expressed a need for an update on
orthopaedics. Moreover, students appreciated scheduled opportunities to collaborate.
23
Structured morning rounds and afternoon shift handovers were considered excellent learning
opportunities where interprofessional collaboration was emphasized and enough time was
allocated. Joined reflective sessions were also important. Periods of less patient activity could
be labelled ‘boring’ or ‘inactive’. Evenings tended to be less productive according to
medical-, physiotherapy- and occupational therapy students. The invested time, organisation
and educational value of basic patient care was criticised. In order to offer enough space for
learning, students of all four professions called for an adjusted workload of basic patient care.
More help from auxiliary nurses was desired. Suggested was also the inclusion of an
auxiliary nurse student to the student team to further balance up towards authentic practice.
Awareness of own development with faith in the future – from chaos to clarity:
Develop personally and professionally
Students increased own awareness and self-­‐confidence as they took own responsibility in patient care. Students from all professions embraced the opportunity to practice and feel
safe in future professional roles and to get the feeling of being like a real physician,
physiotherapist, occupational therapist or nurse. They valued to practise profession-specific
clinical skills and to independently apply their theoretical knowledge in practice. They got
faith as to their professional future and for many it was the first time they were allowed, and
expected, to take own clinical responsibility. Taking the steps ‘from chaos to clarity’ could be
frightening and tough but the outcome was gratifying. Students described this as ‘learning to
fly’.
Develop interprofessionally towards a comprehensive view of practice
Students described the joy to work together in a team towards a shared goal – the patients’
recovery and rehabilitation. They perceived an increased knowledge and understanding of
other professions and got faith in others’ competence and support. To communicate and
collaborate, also promoted students to mirror themselves in others and thereby, become
clearer in own profession. As students experienced that the bits and pieces of teamwork came
together as a unity, they went ‘from chaos to clarity’. Joint difficult medical decisions
enhanced students’ awareness of ethical dilemmas. To achieve a comprehensive view of
patient care was gratifying and they labelled this as ‘the big picture’ or the ‘wholeness’
appeared. They became aware of the value of collaborative patient care and they got faith in
future interprofessional healthcare.
24
Table 2. Identified themes, subthemes and categories.
Theme
An enriching interprofessional
learning environment – a safe place
with space
Subtheme
Category
Authentic and relevant
patients
Authentic care
Sufficient number of patients
Adjusted severity of diagnosis and level of basic care
Well composed and
functioning student teams
Fun and instructive
Safe to be among peers
Complete teams – all professions included
Adjusted number of students
Competent and supportive
supervisors
Allowing students to take responsibility
Instructive and experienced
Providing encouragement and feedback
Creating a safe environment
Being present or readily available
Adjusted ward structure to
support learning
Informative introduction
Scheduled time for interprofessional collaboration and
uniprofessional interaction
Adjusted student schedules to avoid periods of inactivity
Adjusted work load of basic patient care
Awareness of own development with
faith in the future – from chaos to
clarity
Develop personally and
professionally
Increased self-confidence
Visualised own personal and professional development
Practice clinical skills
Apply theoretical knowledge in practice
Practice independency in own professional role
Faith in own professional future
Develop interprofessionally
towards a comprehensive
view of practice
Increase knowledge and understanding of other professions
Trust others’ competencies
Practice communication and collaboration
Mirror oneself in others and become clearer
Overall picture of patient care
Ethical awareness
Faith in future interprofessional healthcare
25
Conclusion
When the community of practice at an IPTW provides a safe, supportive and permissive
learning environment it enables students to mature personally, professionally and
interprofessionally. With embodied understanding of practice, students obtain motivation and
faith in one self as future healthcare professionals interacting with others. To go from chaos
to clarity requires possibilities to interact in a safe place with space. If the learning
environment is impaired, however, students’ development could be halted and limited to only
personal and or professional development and lack development of interprofessional
competence and a comprehensive view.
26
STUDY III
Methods
The study was based on questionnaire data. Patients treated by student teams at an IPTW
were compared with patients treated in usual care. During the study period from 2004 to
2005, the IPTW was incorporated as a part of a regular orthopaedic ward. The setting at the
IPTW was identical to the description ”IPTW at Danderyd Hospital” in the Introduction
chapter. The occupational therapy supervisor was placed at IPTW solely and the regular part
of the ward had another occupational therapist at their service. The rest of the staff had
rotating schedules at the entire ward. Due to pedagogic skills and interest, some of the staff
had their main placement at the IPTW. During weekends and other periods without students’
presence, the regular staff treated all patients. Accordingly, the ward context with its facilities
and personnel was nearly equivalent in the two parts of the ward and the main difference was
the collaborative student participation at the IPTW.
Patients prepared for discharge to their homes were included. Patients discharged to another
clinic or to inpatient aftercare were excluded, as well as, patients discharged during weekends
and holidays when students were not present. In addition, patients readmitted to the hospital
within 4 weeks after discharge were excluded. Thus the IPTW group consisted of patients
treated and prepared for discharge by supervised IPE student teams. The control group
consisted of patients treated by ordinary staff without participation of students. Only patients
with diagnosis and conditions eligible to treat at the IPTW were included in the control
group.
Patients were asked to fill out a questionnaire after they had been prepared for discharge, i.e.
after all information had been given to the patients by students at the IPTW or by ordinary
staff at the regular part of the ward. The patients had the option to fill it out and put it in a
sealed envelope at the ward or they could fill it out at home and use regular mail service.
Patients who did not get a questionnaire at the ward had one sent to their homes within a
week after discharge. In case of a missing answer, one reminder was mailed within 4 weeks
after discharge. In order to diminish bias, only a few persons and no students handed out the
questionnaires to the patients. Patients were given oral and written information on the study
and informed that the answers were to be analysed at group level with no possibility to
identify the answers of a particular individual. The questionnaire consisted of seven questions
chosen from a validated patient satisfaction questionnaire (Jenkinson, Coulter, Bruster,
Richards, & Chandola, 2002) regularly used by the hospital for quality assurance purposes.
The questions concerned collaborative and communicative aspects of care – areas with great
student involvement.
Statistical analysis
Patients at the IPTW were compared to patients treated in usual care. Nonparametric and Chisquare analyses were performed. The patient characteristics are given as n (%) or n ± SD. The
27
results were considered significant at p < 0.05. All analyses were performed with the
STATISTICA Stat Soft, Inc 8.0 package.
Results
The study population consisted of 102 patients in the IPTW group and 85 patients in the
control group. A total of 35 reminders were mailed to patients in the IPTW group and 26 to
the controls. A total of 84 patients filled out the questionnaire in the IPTW group and 62
patients in the control group. The response rates were 82 % and 73 %, respectively. There
were no significant differences between the groups of responding patients regarding gender,
age, length of the hospital stay or type of care (elective or acute). Furthermore, there was no
significant difference between the groups as regards the distribution of the patients’
diagnoses.
As shown in Table 3, the patients treated and prepared for discharge by student teams at the
IPTW felt more well-informed as regards the results of their treatment than the controls (p =
0.02). They also rated a higher involvement in the decisions regarding their care as compared
to controls (p = 0.006). Furthermore, they rated a higher grade of satisfaction with
information regarding possible home assistance as compared to controls (p = 0.003). In
addition, they stated in a higher grade that their family and home situation were taken into
account when they were prepared for discharge as compared to controls (p = 0.0002). No
unfavourable effects were noted in the IPTW patients. The reliability of the questionnaire was
good with a high internal consistency. The Cronbach alpha-coefficient of total satisfaction
with the collaborative and communicative aspects of care (items 1–7) was 0.73.
28
Table 3: Questions and results.
Question
IPTW
Usual care
Yes
Partly
No
NA
Yes
Partly
No
1/ Did you understand
the information given
to you regarding the
results of your
treatment?
61(73)
19(23)
3(4)
36(60)
14(23)
10(17)
2/ Where you
involved in the
decisions regarding
your care?
63(76)
17(20)
3(4)
39(65)
9(15)
12(20)
3/ Did you get enough
information regarding
as to how your
disease will influence
your daily living?
34(44)
28(36)
15(20)
6
22(37)
23(38)
15(25)
2
0.6
4/ Did you receive
information regarding
possible home
assistance?
49(72)
17(25)
2(3)
15
20(49)
12(29)
9(22)
19
0.003
5/ At discharge - were
you informed on
whom to contact if
you had questions?
58(77)
17(23)
7
44(76)
14(24)
3
0.8
6/ Were you bothered,
at discharge, on how
to cope at home?
45(54)
33(39)
6(7)
38(64)
14(24)
7(12)
0.12
7/ Did the staff take
your family and home
situation into account
when preparing for
discharge?
62(75)
19(23)
2(2)
34(59)
10(17)
14(24)
0.0002
1
NA
p-value
1
0.02
0.006
All values are given as count and percentage; n (%)
P-values are calculated according to Chi-square statistics
Answers could be given as Yes; Partly; No or Not applicable (N A)
29
Conclusion
Patients perceived an improved quality of care as concerns collaborative and communicative
aspects of care when their care was given by supervised student teams at the IPTW as
compared to patients treated in usual care. A more structured interprofessional team-based
care may be beneficial even in usual care. Our findings should be reassuring and supportive
in future development of IPTWs.
STUDY IV
Methods
The study is a retrospective cohort study based on registry data from the National Board of
Health and Welfare. Patients operated and treated at the Department of Orthopaedics at
Danderyd University Hospital were selected during academic periods between 2006 and
2011. Ward information for each patient was retrieved through the hospital information
system. These data was merged with information from the national cause of death register
and the in-patient registry using the personal identification number. From the year of 2006,
the IPTW is one out of four wards at Department of Orthopaedics – as opposed to the period
of study III where the IPTW was incorporated as a part of a regular orthopaedic ward. The
setting at the IPTW was identical to the description ”IPTW at Danderyd hospital” in the
Introduction chapter. Out of the three other wards at the department, one had a focus on
planned hip- and knee replacements, one had a trauma/fracture profile and finally, one ward
cared for a mix of orthopaedic diagnoses.
We identified 8,054 consecutively operated patients. 7,311 patients remained after excluding
743 patients with diagnoses not eligible for care at the IPTW ward. Exclusion criteria used in
the registers were: 1) At index hospital stay - Patients with registered diagnoses of severe
infectious disease, severe multiple trauma or other severe conditions that according to the
department’s practice were incompatible with care at the IPTW. 2) At index hospital stay or
during the previous two years - Patients with diagnoses reflecting drug or alcohol abuse,
psychosis, dementia, paralysis, metastatic disease or AIDS/HIV, according to the
corresponding Elixhauser’s and Charlson’s comorbidity groups (Quan et al., 2011),
(Sundararajan et al., 2007), (Quan et al., 2005), (Charlson, Pompei, Ales, & MacKenzie,
1987). Further 1,545 patients with less or equal to 2 days or more than 2 weeks length of stay
and patients treated by ordinary staff during vacation periods were excluded.
Primary outcome measure was readmission rate within 90 days. Secondary outcome
measures were readmission rate within 30 days and one-year survival. Exposure was defined
as the proportion of hospital stay in days, during which student teams treated the patients. The
proportion was categorized into three groups; “Full exposure” (100 % student exposure of
hospital stay), “Mixed exposure” (more than 0 % but less than 100 % student exposure) and
“No exposure” (0% student exposure). At the IPTW there were no student teams present
30
during weekends and student holidays, which affected the proportion of student exposure to
the patients at the ward. For instance, a patient admitted to the IPTW on a Monday and
discharged three days later on a Thursday, were exposed to students 100 % of hospital stay
and therefore belonged to the “Full exposure” group. Consequently, a patient admitted on a
Wednesday and discharged three days later on a Saturday, were exposed to students 75 % of
hospital stay and belonged to the “Mixed exposure” group. A patient hospitalised at one of
the other three wards within the department had 0 % exposure to student teams and therefore
belonged to the “No exposure” group. Confounders adjusted for were age, sex, type of care
(acute or elective), length of stay, and comorbidities.
Statistical analysis
We used Poisson regression for readmissions with offset term for person time (in days) with
one model for readmissions within 30 days and one model for readmissions within 90 days.
Overdispersion in the Poisson regressions was investigated using Cameron and Trivedi’s test.
To compare proportions we used Fisher’s exact test. For survival analysis Cox proportional
hazards regression was used. The proportional hazards assumption was tested using
Grambsch and Therneau’s test. All analyses were performed using R 3.1.1, using the rmspackage (v. 4.2-1) for survival modelling, AER for investigating overdispersion (v. 1.2-2),
knitr (v. 1.7) for reproducible research, Gmisc (v. 1.0.0) with Greg (v. 1.0.0) for table output.
Results
Our final cohort consisted of 5,766 patients with 6,274 admissions. Out of these 58.4 % were
women, and mean age at first occurrence in the study was 63.0 years. The median length of
stay was 4 days. Readmission rates within 90 days did not differ between patients at the
ITPW (full and mixed student exposure groups) and controls (14% vs. 13.5%, p= 0.66).
Neither did readmission rates within 30 days differ (7.4% vs. 7.5%, p= 0.95). Likewise, there
was no difference in one-year mortality between patients at the IPTW (full and mixed student
exposure groups) as compared to usual care. (5.3% vs. 5.2%; p= 0.82). Patient characteristics
and outcomes are presented in Table 4. Poisson regression of readmission rates showed no
significant differences between the groups. Adjusting for confounders showed no marked risk
increase. The estimates for 90 days readmission in student exposed patients at the IPTW (in
the mixed and full exposure groups) varied between 0.89 and 1.03 with an upper confidence
interval (representing a worst case scenario) of 1.26. Readmission rates are presented in Table
5. Sensitivity analysis with Cox proportional hazards regression of one year mortality did
neither identify any significant difference between the groups. Here the estimates of effect
size (hazard ratio; HR) for student exposed patients at the ITPW varied between 0.68 and
0.98 with an upper confidence interval of 1.39. All mortality rates are presented in Table 6. A
forest plot comparing the three different outcomes in relation to student exposure, type of
care, comorbidity, age, sex and length of stay is shown in Figure 6.
31
Table 4: Study population characteristics and outcomes. Continuous variables are
presented as mean and standard deviation.
Control wards
Student exposure†
Interprofessional Training Ward (IPTW)
No
Full
Mixed
(0%)
(100%)
(>0 but<100%)
Patients No
4658
418
690
Age
63.5 (±20.0)
54.9 (±20.3)
64.7 (±21.7)
Male
1,932 (41.5%)
201 (48.1%)
267 (38.7%)
Female
2,726 (58.5%)
217 (51.9%)
423 (61.3%)
Acute
3,046 (65.4%)
239 (57.3%)
620 (89.9%)
Elective
1,610 (34.6%)
178 (42.7%)
70 (10.1%)
Length of stay (days)
4.5 (±2.5)
2.5 (±0.8)
5.6 (±2.8)
Charlson’s index ‡
0.2 (±0.7)
0.2 (±0.5)
0.3 (±0.8)
Deceased during stay
6 (0.1%)
0 (0.0%)
1 (0.1%)
Sex
Type of care
32
Control wards
Student exposure†
Interprofessional Training Ward (IPTW)
No
Full
Mixed
(0%)
(100%)
(>0 but<100%)
No
4,309 (92.5%)
395 (94.5%)
631 (91.4%)
Yes
349 (7.5%)
23 (5.5%)
59 (8.6%)
No
4,029 (86.5%)
380 (90.9%)
573 (83.0%)
Yes
629 (13.5%)
38 (9.1%)
117 (17.0%)
Alive
4,418 (94.8%)
410 (98.1%)
639 (92.6%)
Dead
240 (5.2%)
8 (1.9%)
51 (7.4%)
Readmissions 30 days
Readmissions 90 days
One-year survival
† Student exposure denotes the proportion of hospital stay in which patients were exposed to students. No
(exposure) denotes patients treated at a usual care ward with no student exposure. Full (exposure) denotes
patients treated at the IPTW with 100 % student exposure during hospital stay. Mixed (exposure) denotes
patients treated at the IPTW with >0 % but <100% of student exposure during hospital stay. Comorbidity
measured according to the Charlson’s index (Quan et al., 2011).
33
Table 5: Readmission rates.
Crude
Coef
2.5 % to 97.5 %
Adjusted*
Coef
2.5 % to 97.5 %
Readmission within 30 days
Incidence rate
0.08
0.07 to 0.09
0.08
0.06 to 0.09
No (0 %)
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Full (100%)
0.72
0.46 to 1.08
0.90
0.57 to 1.35
Mixed (>0% but<100%)
1.15
0.86 to 1.50
0.97
0.72 to 1.27
Acute
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Elective
0.55
0.44 to 0.69
0.61
0.48 to 0.77
Charlson’s index‡
1.62
1.49 to 1.74
1.45
1.33 to 1.58
Age
1.03
1.02 to 1.03
1.02
1.01 to 1.03
Male
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Female
1.20
0.99 to 1.46
0.95
0.77 to 1.16
1.08
1.04 to 1.11
0.98
0.94 to 1.02
Student exposure†
Type of care
Sex
Length of stay
34
Crude
Coef
Adjusted*
2.5 % to 97.5 %
Coef
2.5 % to 97.5 %
Readmission within 90 days
Incidence rate
0.15
0.14 to 0.16
0.15
0.13 to 0.17
No (0 %)
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Full (100%)
0.65
0.46 to 0.89
0.89
0.63 to 1.23
Mixed (>0%
but<100%)
1.29
1.05 to 1.56
1.03
0.84 to 1.26
Acute
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Elective
0.53
0.44 to 0.63
0.61
0.51 to 0.73
Charlson’s
index‡
1.65
1.55 to 1.74
1.43
1.34 to 1.52
Age
1.03
1.03 to 1.03
1.02
1.02 to 1.03
Male
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Female
1.29
1.12 to 1.49
0.97
0.83 to 1.13
1.12
1.10 to 1.15
1.02
0.99 to 1.05
Student exposure†
Type of care
Sex
Length of stay
* Confounders adjusted for are type of care, comorbidity, median age, sex, and median length of stay.
† Student exposure denotes the proportion of hospital stay in which patients were exposed to students. No
(exposure) denotes patients treated at a usual ward with no student team exposure. Full (exposure) denotes
patients treated at the interprofessional training ward (IPTW) with 100 % student exposure during hospital stay.
Mixed (exposure) denotes patients treated at IPTW with >0 % but <100% of student exposure during hospital
stay
‡Comorbidity measured according to the Charlson’s index (Quan et al., 2011).
35
Table 6: Hazard ratios for one-year mortality after admission.
Crude
Adjusted*
HR
2.5 % to 97.5 %
HR
2.5 % to 97.5 %
No (0 %)
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Full (100%)
0.37
0.18 to 0.75
0.68
0.33 to 1.39
Mixed (>0% but<100%)
1.47
1.08 to 1.99
0.98
0.71 to 1.34
Acute
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Elective
0.19
0.13 to 0.29
0.36
0.24 to 0.56
Charlson’s index‡
1.97
1.82 to 2.12
1.48
1.36 to 1.60
Age
1.11
1.10 to 1.13
1.10
1.09 to 1.12
Male
1.00
ref
1.00
ref
Female
1.11
0.88 to 1.41
0.54
0.43 to 0.69
1.19
1.15 to 1.23
0.98
0.93 to 1.02
Student exposure†
Type of care
Sex
Length of stay (days)
* Confounders adjusted for are type of care, comorbidity, age, sex, and length of stay. For continuous variables
the reference values are set to 0.
† Student exposure denotes the proportion of hospital stay in which patients were exposed to students. No
(exposure) denotes patients treated at a usual ward with no student exposure. Full (exposure) denotes patients
treated at the interprofessional training ward (IPTW) with 100 % student exposure during hospital stay. Mixed
(exposure) denotes patients treated at the IPTW with >0 % but <100% student exposure during hospital stay.
‡Comorbidities measured according to the Charlson’s index (Quan et al., 2011).
36
Figure 6: A forest plot comparing the relative risk of readmission in 30 and 90 days respectively of
mortality within one year - in relation to student exposure, type of care, comorbidity, age, sex and length
of stay. Student exposure denotes the proportion of hospital stay in which patients were exposed to students. No
denotes patients at a control ward with no student exposure. Full denotes patients at the interprofessional training
ward (IPTW) with 100 % of student exposure during hospital stay. Mixed denotes patients at the IPTW with >0
% but <100% of student exposure during hospital stay. Comorbidities were measured according to the
Charlson’s index (Quan et al., 2011). For continuous variables the reference values were set to 0.
Conclusion
Our analysis showed no indication of an increased risk for readmission and mortality in
patients treated by supervised student teams at an interprofessional training ward as compared
to usual care. The results should reassure further implementation of interprofessional
education in authentic patient based contexts.
37
5 DISCUSSION
This thesis shows that interprofessional active patient based learning at an IPTW effectively
meets students’ intended learning outcomes. If the learning environment is safe, supportive,
permissive and structured, students are able to develop professionally and interprofessionally
towards a comprehensive view of practice. According to students, patients are provided with
good medical care, nursing and rehabilitation. According to patients at the IPTW, their care is
of high quality as to communicative and collaborative aspect of care. In addition, objective
data on readmissions and mortality did not show any differences as compared to usual care.
As described earlier there are several interprofessional intended learning outcomes for
students to achieve during their experiencebased learning at the IPTW. Kolb states that
learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of
experience (Kolb 1984). First, the emphasis is on the process of adaptation and learning as
opposed to content or outcomes. Second, knowledge is a transformation process, being
continuously created and recreated, not an independent entity to be acquired or transmitted.
Third, learning transforms experience in both its objective and subjective forms and finally,
to understand learning, we must understand the nature of knowledge (epistemology). The
interprofessional learning objectives at IPTW can be related to Kolbs ‘experiential learning
cycle’ and covers all four stages.
Taking care of patients together in an interprofessional team is per definition a complex task.
That implies that the learning objectives per se are grounded at the two highest levels of the
Structure of Observed Learning Outcomes (SOLO) taxonomy (Biggs & Tang, 2007). The
taxonomy is a general and systematic framework to describe how a learner’s performance
grows in complexity and can be used to define or evaluate learning outcomes. As students
learn, they pass different stages of increasing complexity. First a quantitative change, as the
amount of details increase. Then a qualitative change, as the details become integrated into a
structural pattern. The different levels are: prestructural, unistructural, multistructural,
relational and extended abstract.
TO DEVELOP OWN PROFESSIONAL ROLE IN AN INTERPROFESSIONAL
CONTEXT
Study I shows that the four student groups (medical, nurse, physiotherapy and occupational
therapy students) perceived an increased clarity of their own professional role. This is worth
considering since all students – except medical students – were in their last term of prequalifying education. In accordance with Bleakley (Bleakley et al., 2011) we state that
students apparently perceived a value of a clear role in a specific and authentic sociocultural
context with space and place for their learning. Occupational therapy students had the lowest
clarity of their own professional role before the IPTW course. Fortunately, they also had the
greatest gain during the course and did not differ in clarity of own role from other students
38
after the course. For a majority, IPTW was their first opportunity to practice interprofessional
teamwork and also the first chance to expose their professional role to others.
Becoming a professional is a complex and only partly described process (Lindquist, Engardt,
Garnham, Poland, & Richardson, 2006). The skill acquisition model of Dreyfus (Dreyfus et
al., 1986) describes a one-dimension model of skill development with increasing professional
experience. Dall’Alba & Sandberg (Dall'Alba & Sandberg, 2006) developed the model by
adding a dimension of understanding of, and in, practice i.e. ‘embodied understanding’ in a
given context. In embodied understanding, knowledge becomes integrated into a
‘professional way-of-being’. In study II we found that students sensed a joyful and inspiring
embodied understanding of practice when acting and being like a ‘real’ doctor, nurse,
physiotherapist or an occupational therapist. Supervisors’ and peers’ support and feedback
enhanced the development of embodied understanding. A study by Silén at al has explored
the supervisors’ perspective on supervision at the workplace and enhances the importance of
feedback and of being a role model not only of professional skills but also in a ‘professional
way-of-being’ in the context (Silén 2011).
According to Dornan et al, medical students must develop two qualities in order to reach their
ultimate goal of helping patients. One is practical competence; the other is a state of mind that
includes confidence, motivation and a sense of professional identity. The two qualities
reinforce one another. When ‘experience-based learning’ at a workplace offers a relatively
high level of participation, it rewards the students, particularly when students adopt the role
of a doctor being involved in the care of the patients. On the other hand, students quickly
become bored if they remain as passive observers. An effective workplace teacher is
therefore, someone who simultaneously can support and challenge students (Dornan et al.,
2007). Applied to the experience-based learning at IPTW (study II), we find that the four
student groups developed a sense of professional identity as they were supported and
challenged by supervisors to independently care for authentic patients. They increased their
self-confidence and visualized own professional development as they applied theoretical
knowledge into practice. On the other hand, periods with a lack of patients or with less
profession-specific clinical activity, were considered boring to students.
TO INCREASE KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING OF OTHER
PROFESSIONS’ COMPETENCES
Study I shows that the four student groups perceived a significant increased understanding
and knowledge of the other professions. Medical and nursing students perceived the greatest
gain in their knowledge of occupational therapy. Occupational therapy students’ greatest
gain concerned medicine and nursing. For physiotherapy students the significant increase in
perceived knowledge of others was similar for the three other professions. The results are
probably explained by the fact that both medical and nurse students have some interaction
with doctors and nurses, less with physiotherapists and very limited interaction with
occupational therapists and vice versa during uniprofessional clerkships prior to the IPTW
(Hallin et al., 2009).
39
Students at the IPTW are not learning alone. They are constantly interacting and learning
together with peers. Learning is a social process that can both be enhanced and reduced by
involving peers. A cooperative reward structure emerges when learners realise that the only
way to achieve their personal goal is to ensure that the group achieves its goal. A competitive
reward structure, in contrast, exists when learners perceive that they can only achieve their
personal goal at the expense of the group achieving its goal. Supervisors have a great impact
on which reward system is in use (Ladyshewsky, 2006). At the IPTW, the student team’s
sharing of a patient supports a cooperative peer learning experience. Students learn to use the
team’s different skills and trust its different competences for the patient’s best (study II).
IPE implies learning with a greater level of interactivity between professions where both
differences as well as similarities are discussed (Barr, 1996). When students look at a task
from both own, as well as from the perspective of others, they acquire knowledge, skills and
attitudes not possible in uniprofessional education (Funnell 1995). A prerequisite at the IPTW
course, in contrast to uniprofessional education, is the participation in a student team, that
impies interaction with peers. This peer learning is consistently and implicitly used in the
IPTW course. In study II, students described the joy of being among peers from different
professions. To be at the same level facilitated their learning, as it felt safe to ask questions
and to discuss any matter. Being among peers also helped students to mirror themselves in
others and become clearer in own role. Students reported a positive change in their
knowledge of, trust in and attitude towards each other. Despite this fact, this is not a thesis
that focuses on attitudes per se. Jacobsen & Lindqvist found an attitude shift during
teamtraining at an interprofessional training unit (ITU) in Denmark. Students began to see
members of other professions as more like members of their own in respect of the studied
core concepts of caring and subservience. The greatest change of students’ attitudes before
and after their stay in the ITU was observed for their views of doctors, which were improved.
They argued that it was likely to be a result of students arriving with certain stereotypes of
doctors that simply did not fit with what they observed during their time at the ITU (Jacobsen
& Lindqvist 2009).
TO DEVELOP COMMUNICATION, TEAMWORK AND A COMPREHENSIVE VIEW
OF PRACTICE
In study I, the four student groups acknowledged the importance to practice and comprehend
communication and teamwork for good patient care. When comparing the IPTW course to
previous clinical courses, the four student groups found IPTW’s contribution significantly
higher. Medical students accounted for the highest ratings. A probable explanation is that
most of medical student’s clinical practice in Sweden is uniprofessional and disciplinary.
They seldom interact with students of other professions and their interaction with other health
professionals is also limited.
40
Students described the joy of working together in a team towards a shared goal – the patients’
recovery and rehabilitation (study II). This is inline with a study using Contextual Activity
Sampling (CASS) - a method using mobile phones to study learning experiences during ongoing clinical activities. This study also showed that students at an IPTW in Sweden reported
’a sense of flow’ when working together in close involvement with patients (Lachmann,
Ponzer, Johansson, Benson, & Karlgren, 2013).
Interprofessional collaboration is assumed to be beneficial because it allows a more holistic
approach to patient care than what is possible in uniprofessional care (Funnell 1995). This is
in tune with findings in study II. When students experienced that the bits and pieces of
teamwork came together as a unity – they went from ’chaos to clarity’. They described a
joyful achievement of a comprehensive view of patient care - ’the big picture’ or ’wholeness’
appeared. According to Dall’Alba and Sandberg (Dall'Alba & Sandberg, 2006) a
preunderstanding impacts further development of embodied understanding. However, student
statements indicate that even students without a concrete pre-understanding of practice were,
during the short period at the IPTW, yet able to pass the whole way from chaos to clarity and
to get faith in future collaborative patient care.
THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AT AN IPTW
When investigating what, according to students, characterizes an enriching learning
environment (study II) we found it consists of authentic and relevant patients, well composed
and functioning student teams, competent and supportive supervisors and an adjusted ward
structure to support learning. In short we named it ‘a safe place with space’. ‘Safe’ due to
supervisors’ support, competence and presence as well as the safety being among student
peers. ‘Place’ denotes the ward area at the IPTW. ‘Space’ is the adjusted course structure and
schedule to release time to support learning and also the supervisors’ encouragement of
student independency.
The learning environment of the IPTW can be applied to three interrelated dimensions of a
community of practice (CoP) described by Wenger (Wenger, 1998). Students practiced
Mutual engagement through communication with each other and the supervisors when
discussing the day-to-day patient care. Students increased their understanding of the joint
enterprise by working together in realistic learning activities when caring for patients.
Finally, supervisors upheld the community and its shared repertoire when they introduced
and engaged students to the culture.
Li et al recommend focusing on optimizing three specific characteristics of the CoP concept
(Li et al., 2009). In accordance, we can mirror findings of the learning environment in
relation to these characteristics: Support for members to interact with each other; Being
among peers supported interaction. Inequality is a barrier to interaction and this might explain
why students experienced a lack of interaction with a profession, if missing in their student
team - even when a supervisor covered up for the deficit. Allocating time to informal
interaction supported further interaction. The basic patient care could be too taxing and time
41
consuming, thus interfering with time to interact. Here, help by auxiliary nurses was essential.
Also, students valued scheduled opportunities to interact such as structured morning rounds,
shift handovers, etc. Emphasize on learning and sharing knowledge; A learning environment
with authentic care stimulated students to take responsibility, learn and share knowledge. The
presence and support by the supervisors were crucial. The scheduled gatherings also
stimulated students’ learning and sharing of knowledge. On the contrary, low activity times
or not enough patients, had the opposite effect. Again, we can point out students’ frustration
having to perform too much auxiliary nurse tasks. The students perceived a loss of learning
focus when this occurred. For clinical situations to emphasize learning and sharing of
knowledge all students need to act in their own profession and in realistic collaborative work.
Building a sense of belonging within groups; The supervisors’ attitude, support and
competence in combination with a shared repertoire created a strong CoP where interactions
were based on mutual respect and trust. As the presence of students is a corner stone in the
IPTW concept, they easily develop a sense of belonging, in contrast to more traditional
placements where students may experience “being in the way” (Hagg-Martinell, Hult,
Henriksson, & Kiessling, 2014). Students criticized substituting supervisors’ lack of
enthusiasm or lack of IPTW experience. As these supervisors were new members to the
community, they disrupted the sense of belonging that the CoP had developed. The same
disturbance can be applied to supervisors not being sufficiently involved. It is important to
realize that an IPTW represents a special CoP and therefore, vital to provide newcomers –
both students and supervisors – with a thorough introduction and allow them time to adjust.
Dornan also points out the importance of being absorbed into the culture of a CoP. When
students enter a new workplace they may lose confidence in knowledge they have spent years
acquiring. Likewise, stress levels peak when students start learning at new workplaces
because they become acutely aware of their own incompetence and unimportance (Dornan et
al., 2007). The importance of being accepted and included in the community has also been
pointed out by Hägg-Martinell et al who shows that students experience a professional
growth when the community of practice accepts them, and competent and enthusiastic
supervisors give them opportunities to interact with patients and to develop their own
responsibilities (Hagg-Martinell et al., 2014).
Concerning patients’ basic care and students’ difficulties in dealing with it, having the time
for it or understanding that it may offer opportunities for interprofessional learning, have been
found by others (Hylin, Nyholm, Mattiasson, & Ponzer, 2007), (Lidskog, Lofmark, &
Ahlstrom, 2009), (Reeves & Freeth, 2002).
42
THE RELATION BETWEEN THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT AT IPTW AND
STUDENTS’ DEVELOPMENT
In study II, we found four important elements that characterizes an enriching learning
environment – a safe place with space; authentic and relevant patients, well composed and
functioning student teams, competent and supportive supervisors and an adjusted ward
structure to support learning. In such a learning environment, students develop awareness of
own development with faith in the future – from chaos to clarity characterized by personal
and professional development on to interprofessional development towards a comprehensive
view of practice. This relation is illustrated in figure 7. On the other hand, if important
elements in the learning environment is missing or incomplete – as a lack of patients, lack of
a profession representation in the student team, not a fully introduced substituting supervisor
or too much time spent on patients’ basic care – students’ development may be halted at the
level of personal and some professional development but insufficient or lacking in
interprofessional development as well as comprehensive view of practice and faith in the
future. This relation is illustrated in figure 8.
Figure 7. The characteristics of an enriching learning environment and of students’ development.
Figure 8. An insufficient learning environment deficient of important elements and how it relates to
students’ development being stalled.
43
PATIENT OUTCOME OF CARE AT AN IPTW
All four student groups perceived that the patients were provided with good medical care,
nursing and rehabilitation (study I).
When looking from patients’ view (study III), we found that patients treated by students at
the IPTW perceived a higher quality of care compared to patients at a comparable
orthopaedic ward. Aspects on communication and collaboration were studied. Patients treated
at the IPTW perceived increased own participation in decisions on their treatment, felt better
prepared at discharge and they felt better informed. These results are probably explained by
the collaborative approach at the IPTW.
The supervisors’ role and an adjusted ward structure was important to the collaborative care
of the patients. Each day shift at the IPTW started with a team conference with students and
supervisors. Students discussed the patients’ relevant goals of the day and appointed goals of
the hospital stay. They specified profession-specific goals related to the patients and,
subsequently, the whole student team agreed upon a conjoined strategy best suited to the
patients’ needs. Supervisors helped students in the planning, when needed. The overall
strategy was patient-centered and to emphasize collaboration. Accordingly, the students were
well prepared both professionally and interprofessionally when they started a day’s work. A
follow-up of patients’ goals was made at handover to the evening shift student team. Most
day shifts ended with a reflective session where the student team together with one supervisor
discussed and reflected on the work of the day.
Objective patient data were analysed in study IV. No significant differences in 30- or 90- day
readmission rates or in one-year mortality were found in patients treated by supervised
interprofessional student teams at an IPTW as compared to usual care.
Studies on patient outcome on undergraduate health education are scarce and it is difficult to
compare results as the contexts of learning differ between hospitals, countries and between
specialities. With this in mind, it is worth mentioning a recent meta-analysis on peerreviewed English-language studies. The aim was to identify objective patient outcomes in
teaching versus nonteaching general internal medicine settings. No convincing differences
were found in inpatient mortality, 30-day readmission or length of stay (Au, Padwal,
Majumdar & McAlister, 2014). The results are in line with our study but students’ level of
education, number of attending students and the contexts differ, as the reviewed studies did
not concern undergraduate interprofessional student teams at an orthopaedic ward.
When looking at research on orthopaedic patients in traditional care, our results are
comparable. A readmission rate at 7,5 % within 30 days, 14 % within 90 days and one-year
mortality at 5 % in student treated patients at the IPTW, is below or in line with orthopaedic
literature. A readmission rate at 19 % within 90 days was found in hip fracture patients in the
UK (Hahnel, Burdekin & Anand, 2009). Our cohort consisted of patients eligible for care at
an IPTW and therefore healthier as compared to orthopaedic fracture patients in general.
44
There is an increasing interest in research evaluating patient outcome and quality of care
performed by teams consisting of qualified professionals. A report from a nurse-coordinated,
multidisciplinary, ambulatory programme demonstrated that healthier lifestyles and
improvement in risk factors were achieved among patients with coronary heart disease as
compared to standard care, indicating the usefulness of interprofessional work. (Wood et al.,
2008).
IPE research has generally focused on its effects on students, but its effect on patients needs
further studies. Patient outcome and quality of practice is an important but intricate field of
IPE research (Barr et al., 2006). Existing studies on direct patient effects of patient based IPE
are mainly based on patients’ subjective perceived outcomes (Brewer & Stewart-Wynne,
2013), (Hallin, Henriksson, Dalen, & Kiessling, 2011), (Hansen & Jacobsen, 2009). To our
knowledge there are no previous studies on patient safety at an IPTW based on objective
patient outcome variables.
In a Cochrane review of IPE research on patient outcomes, Reeves et al requested future IPE
studies to comprise of randomised controlled studies with rigorous randomisation or
allocation procedures, larger sample sizes, more appropriate control groups and more explicit
focuses, in order to improve the evidence base of IPE (Reeves et al., 2008). We believe we
have fulfilled some of these requests.
45
TO EVALUATE OUTCOME OF IPTW LEARNING AT DIFFERENT LEVELS
Kirkpatrick’s classification of educational outomes have four levels where the relevance to
patients and also the complexity of the evaluation increases by each level (Kirkpatrick 1967).
Hammick et al, revised Kirkpatrick’s levels as regards to IPE outcomes by adding two levels
(Hammick, Freeth, Koppel, Reeves, & Barr, 2007). Figure 9 illustrates the study levels of this
thesis.
"#$#%&'(#!)*+!
,&-#'./!
8.354!
9:!;!
012(3$.4!&'5!
(*6,$#71.4!
*)!#%&$3&-*'!
8.354!
9:!;!
3/)/;<&*<(*
=5'/)<&*5)0*".%/)<&*
845)1/*%)*
9715)%&5'()5.*
:75"'"/*
!
!
3/456%($75. "45)1/*
8.354!
<:!=!
8.354!
<:!=!
!"#$%&%'()*(+*
,)(-./01/*2*&,%..&*
Modification of
perceptions &
attitudes
Reactions
Improvements in health or well
being of patients and clients
Wider changes in the
organization and delivery of care
Individuals’ transfer of interprofessional
learning to their practice setting and
their changed professional practice
Knowledge and skills linked to
interprofessional collaboration
Changes in reciprocal attitudes or perceptions
between participant groups.
Changes in perception or attitude towards the
value and use of team approaches to caring
for a specific client group
Learners’ views on the learning
experience and its interprofessional
nature
Figure 9: Classificaton of IPE outcome at six levels. The relevance to patients and the complexity of the
evaluation increases by each level of the ladder. Adopted from Kirkpatrick (1967) and (Hammick et al., 2007).
The levels of evaluation used in the four studies is shown.
46
To sum up, learning together at the IPTW leads to collaborative positive effects on both
students and patients. The results are well in line with the WHO report on IPE intents (WHO,
2010). Figure 10 illustrates the pathway between IPTW and collaborative practice-ready
students and the outcomes in patients and students.
!
!
"#$%&'&(!)*(#)+#%!)*!,*%-!)*(#)+#%!.*%!/#0#%!+#$1)+
!
%
"),.754%
!"#$%
8562.754%
&'(()*'+),-.%
/+)0,0.1+.)23%
4562.754%
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
¥ 
"),.754%
"),.75%0.75+.2%0)+.%
8)9.%%
!7-'(-.2%:7%2.0:4:'74%'9%0)+.%
$.((%:79'+;.2%
$.((%/+./)+.2%9'+%2:40<)+=.%
8562.754%)//+')0<:7=%
"+'9.44:'7)(%0';/.5.70.%
!75.+/+'9.44:'7)(%0';/.5.70.%
&';/+.<.72%:;/'+5)70.%'9%
0';;67:0),'7%>%5.);%?'+@%%
A):5<%:7%9656+.%0'(()*'+),-.%
/),.75%0)+.%
&';/+.<.74:-.%-:.?%'9%0)+.%
Figur 10. The pathway of learning together at an IPTW and collaborative practice-ready students and the
effect on patients and students.
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
A mixed method approach was used to obtain a more in depth understanding of the
multidimensional issues of interprofessional learning. Students’ learning and outcomes were
studied from both a student and a patient perspective, with both quantitative and qualitative
methods and both objectively measurable and individually perceived outcome measures.
This thesis covers a long study period of 11 years. The two studies on students overlap partly,
meaning the same students could be included in both studies. On the other hand, no data
between the studies was shared. The two studies on patients are separated in time. A total of
949 students and 5912 patients have contributed with data.
One strength of study I is the focus on each individual’s progress over time. This means that
we included prospective ratings. Another strength is a response rate exceeding 95 %. The
response rate, the large number of students and the long study period makes the results
robust. The questionnaire in use had high face validity. One weakness is the lack in gender
47
specific results. However, except for medical students, almost all students were women.
In study II, the use of a large amount of data contributes to trustworthiness. Saturation was
amply reached after including 333 students during eight years. The findings were consistent
over time as well as between student groups. Given the design of the study it was not possible
to assess the effects of learning in the ITPW context but mere to explore prominent themes
associated to learning. To enrich the findings, the use of focus group interviews could have
been added.
A strength in study III is the mere fact that it evaluates the effects of IPE on patient outcome.
Another strength is the use of a control group. One weakness is that it was not possible to
randomize the patients.
Study IV has many strengths. To our knowledge it is the first study to evaluate patient safety
at an IPTW based on objective data. A large sample size and from one centre, a long study
period and an appropriate control group make the findings robust. An observational study, as
ours, cannot fully guarantee equal patient groups. Both acute and planned patients were
admitted and no randomization of patients to the different wards was feasible. However, our
inclusion and exclusion criteria aimed to make the groups as comparable as possible and the
data is adjusted for confounders.
48
6 GENERAL CONCLUSIONS
We have shown that interprofessional learning at a training ward increased students’
understanding and knowledge of professional and interprofessional competency. Students
found the IPTW experience to be worthwhile, instructive, permissive and fun. In an enriching
learning environment, adapted to student participation, a transition into an embodied
understanding of being a professional was possible in only two weeks. In the beginning of the
course, students might have experienced anxiety and chaos, but towards the end, a sense of
flow and clarity. Just in time to relish this feeling of flow, clarity of own and others roles and
a comprehensive view on patient care, it was time to end the course, Students suggested
longer IPTW alike periods, more of the same at other workplace rotations as well as earlier in
their clinical education.
We have also shown positive effects of interprofessional learning on patients’ quality of care.
As regards aspects of communication and collaboration it was beneficial to include students
in the close care of patients. In addition, we did not find any difference in patient safety as
regards to readmissions or deaths between patients treated by student teams at the IPTW as
compared to traditional care. A prerequisite to secure patient safety is, of course, guidance of
skilled supervisors who allow students to take own responsibility with preserved patient
safety.
49
7 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE AND FURTHER
RESEARCH
IMPLICATION FOR PRACTICE
This thesis has important clinical education implications. Interprofessional learning in
authentic care, as an IPTW, is an effective educational concept where students learn to
collaborate over professional boundaries when taking care of patients. Questions have been
raised about patients’ safety. However, we found that patients treated by supervised
interprofessional student teams perceived a greater quality of care in aspects of
communication and collaboration as compared to usual care. A more structured
interprofessional team-based care may be beneficial even in usual care. In addition, we found
no indications of an increased risk, as regards readmissions and mortality, between patients at
the IPTW compared to usual care and we conclude this training can be performed with
preserved patient safety. A prerequisite to secure a safe and high quality care is of course
guidance of skilled supervisors as well as ward routines well adapted to student participation.
Our results should reassure to further implement and disseminate the IPTW concept to other
areas and education periods, where students from several programmes can perform
workplace learning.
IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
In order to get a deeper understanding on how students’ actually learn and interact when they
participate in IPE, more studies with other methods are needed, e.g. ethnographic methods.
One interesting field of research would be to study aspects on IPE supervisors. Focus group
interviews could help to create hypothesis on characteristics, and later be followed up by
quantitative and perhaps comparative studies on other professionals.
As to patients’ safety, more studies are needed to confirm, reject or reproduce our results and
advantageously, studies in other contexts and on other patient populations.
50
8 QUESTIONNAIRES
Skattning inför klinisk utbildning på avdelning 56, KUA
Studieprogram……………………………………………Kön …………Din symbol
□□
1. Hur uppfattar Du Din profession/yrkesroll idag?
otydlig
________________________________________________________
tydlig
2. Kommunikation och lagarbete anses viktigt för att tillgodose patientens behov av medicinsk vård,
omvårdnad och rehabilitering. I hur hög grad anser Du att den kliniska utbildningen före KUA har
bidragit till att öka förståelsen för detta påstående?
I låg grad
________________________________________________________
i hög grad
3. Hur stor kunskap har Du om andra yrkesgruppers arbete idag? (uteslut Din egen profession)
Din kunskap gällande arbetsterapeuter:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande läkare:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande sjukgymnaster:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande sjuksköterskor:
Liten kunskap _________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
51
Utvärdering av klinisk utbildning på avdelning 56, KUA
Studieprogram……………………………………………Kön …………Din symbol □ □
1. Hur uppfattar Du Din profession/yrkesroll idag (efter KUA)?
otydlig
________________________________________________________
tydlig
2. Kommunikation och lagarbete anses viktigt för att tillgodose patientens behov av medicinsk vård,
omvårdnad och rehabilitering. I hur hög grad anser Du att den kliniska utbildningen på KUA har
bidragit till att öka förståelsen för detta påstående?
I låg grad
________________________________________________________
i hög grad
3. Hur stor kunskap har Du idag (efter KUA) om andra yrkesgruppers arbete? (uteslut Din egen)
Din kunskap gällande arbetsterapeuter:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande läkare:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande sjukgymnaster:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
Din kunskap gällande sjuksköterskor:
liten kunskap ________________________________________________________
stor kunskap
4. Vad anser du allmänt om utbildningsmomentet på KUA? Vid behov, skriv på baksidan!
Tack för dina synpunkter!
52
PATIENTENKÄT
Frågor gällande Din senaste vistelse på avdelning 56 eller KUA
Ortopedkliniken, Danderyds sjukhus.
DITT FÖDELSEÅR: _____
DITT KÖN: KVINNA
MAN
Kryssa i det svar som stämmer bäst överens med din uppfattning.
1. Fick Du veta resultaten av behandlingen på ett sådant sätt att Du
förstod?
Ja, helt och hållet……………….
Ja, delvis………………………..
Nej………………………………
Jag fick inte veta några resultat…
Jag väntar på svar………………
2. Kände Du Dig delaktig i beslut om Din vård?
Ja, ofta…………………………
Ja, ibland………………………
Nej…………………………….
3. Fick Du tillräcklig information om hur Din sjukdom eller Dina
besvär kommer att inverka på Ditt dagliga liv, t ex när Du kan
börja arbeta, motionera, återuppta Dina vardagliga aktiviteter
och intressen?
Ja, helt och hållet………………..
Ja, delvis…………………………
Nej……………………………….
Ej aktuellt………………………..
53
4. Fick Du information om vilken hjälp Du kan få hemma, t ex
hemsjukvård, hemtjänst, hjälpmedel eller bostadsanpassning?
Ja, helt och hållet……………
Ja, delvis……………………
Nej………………………….
Ej aktuellt……………………
5. Fick Du i samband med utskrivningen veta vart Du kan vända
Dig om Du har frågor om Din sjukdom eller behandling?
Ja…………………………
Nej………………………..
Ej aktuellt…………………
6. Kände Du Dig orolig i samband med utskrivningen för hur Du
skulle klara Dig hemma?
Ja, till stor del…………………
Ja, lite grann…………………..
Nej…………………………….
7. Tog personalen hänsyn till Dina hem- och familjeförhållanden
när Din utskrivning planerades?
Ja, helt och hållet……………
Ja, delvis…………………….
Nej…………………………..
Eventuella kommentarer:
Ett varmt tack för din medverkan !
54
9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I wish to express my sincere gratitude to all persons who in different ways have made this
work possible. In particular, I want to thank:
Anna Kiessling – my supervisor. I have always admired your knowledge of this research
field. Along the way – in this case eight years! – I have found out that you are in fact
knowledgeable in most things in life! Thank you so much for all your guidance and support!
Thank you even more for giving me structure and for your never ending and optimistic
patience!
Professor Peter Henriksson – my co-supervisor. Thank you for being engaged in all studies.
Thank you also for many years of statistical support and knowledge, for very careful reading
through all texts, and for always popping into the room – positive and interested – to repeat
“this is very important research”!
Professor Nils Dalén – my co-supervisor. Thank you for positive support along this journey
and for your assistance in the first patient study in particular. Thank you for sharing your
wisdom of life and for repeating the fact that “one should focus on things that give joy”!
Olof Sköldenberg – my co-supervisor. Thank you for being the vivid research locomotive at
the Department of Orthopaedics. Your positive attitude and easiness is contagious!
Max Gordon. Thank you for being a hero in statistics and for playing a crucial role in the last
study of this thesis!
Annika and Gösta Waldner. Thank you Annika for many years of supervising together and
for taking part in the first study. Thank you Gösta for transferring data from student paper
questionnaires onto computer files and for sharing the results to the IPTW supervisors.
Supervisors and faculty at the IPTW. Thank you for many fruitful years of working together.
Thank you for your support of and belief in the students. Also thank you for supporting the
IPTW concept during its first years when attitudes towards IPTW were not always sunshine. I
especially want to thank all supervising nurses – you do goodness!
Students at the IPTW. Thank you for your willingness to share your experiences and doing so
with very high response rates! Also thank you for many joyful and intense years.
Patients at the IPTW. Thank you for kindly answering questionnaires. Thank you for
believing in the IPTW concept and for letting students care for you.
Nina Ringart, Håkan Wallén and Erik Näslund at the Department of Clinical Sciences at
Karolinska Institutet, Danderyd Hospital. Thank you for taking such a good care for
researchers at Danderyd Hospital.
55
Ulf Lillcrona and Gustaf Neander (Danderyd hospital) and Magnus Forssblad (Artro Clinic)
- my three bosses during these years. Thank you Ulf and Gustaf for believing in and
supporting the IPTW as well as my studies. Thank you Magnus for giving me time off to
finish this thesis.
Tove - my daughter. Thank you Tovetott for bearing with me and, despite odd eating and
sleeping routines, still being cheerful and supportive. You know I could not have managed
the last day before printing this thesis without you!
Hallinarna, Collinarna, Anna, Agata, Lena, Showflickor, Phontrattar, Dear relatives and
friends. Thank you for everything! I also want to acknowledge Stockholm City Council and Karolinska Institutet for financial
support (ALF).
56
10 REFERENCES
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (2013). Makin Health Care Safer II. An
Updated Critical Analysis of the Evidence for Patient Safety Practices. Evidence
Reports/Technology Assessments, No 211. Report No: 13-E001-EF(march), 472479.
Au, A., Padwal, R., Majumdar, S. R., McAlister, F. A. (2014). Patient outcomes in teaching
versus nonteaching general internal medicine services: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. (1938-808X (Electronic)).
Barr, H. (1996). Ends and Means in Interprofessional Education: Towards a Typography.
Education for health, 9(3), 341-353.
Barr, H. (2013). Toward a theoretical framework for interprofessional education. J
Interprof Care, 27(1), 4-9. doi: 10.3109/13561820.2012.698328
Barr, H., Freeth, D., Hammick, M., Koppel, I., & Reeves, S. (2006). The evidence base and
recommendations for interprofessional education in health and social care. J
Interprof Care, 20(1), 75-78. doi: 10.1080/13561820600556182
Benner, P., Tanner, C., & Chesla, C. (1992). From beginner to expert: gaining a
differentiated clinical world in critical care nursing. ANS Adv Nurs Sci, 14(3), 1328.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2007). Teaching for Quality Learning at University (Society for
Research Into Higher Education): Open University Press.
Bleakley, A., Bligh, J., & Browne, J. (2011). Medical Education for the Future [Elektronisk
resurs] : Identity, Power and Location. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Bowling, A. (1997). Social research on health: Sociological and psychological concepts and
approaches. In: Bowling A, editor. Research Methods in Health: Investigating Health
and Health Services. Buckingham, Philadelphia: Open University Press. (page 17–
45).
Brewer, M. L., & Stewart-Wynne, E. G. (2013). An Australian hospital-based student
training ward delivering safe, client-centred care while developing students'
interprofessional practice capabilities. J Interprof Care, 27(6), 482-488. doi:
10.3109/13561820.2013.811639
CAIPE. (2002). The definition and principles of interprofessional education.
http://www.caipe.org.uk/aboutus/the-definition-and-principles-ofCharlson, M. E., Pompei, P., Ales, K. L., & MacKenzie, C. R. (1987). A new method of
classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and
validation. J Chronic Dis, 40(5), 373-383.
D'Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L., & Beaulieu, M. D. (2005).
The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: core concepts and
theoretical frameworks. J Interprof Care, 19 Suppl 1, 116-131. doi:
10.1080/13561820500082529
Dall'Alba, G., & Sandberg, J. (2006). Unveiling Professional Development: A Critical
Review of Stage Models. Review of Educational Research, 76(3), 383-412.
Dornan, T., Boshuizen, H., King, N., & Scherpbier, A. (2007). Experience-based learning:
a model linking the processes and outcomes of medical students' workplace
learning. Med Educ, 41(1), 84-91. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02652.x
Dreyfus, H. L., Dreyfus, S. E., & Athanasiou, T. (1986). Mind over machine : the power of
human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press.
Funnell, P. (1995). Exploring the value of interprofessional learning. In: Soothill KW, editor.
57
Interprofessional Relations in Health Care. CL, London: Edward Arnold. (Page 163–
1719.
Graneheim, U. H., & Lundman, B. (2004). Qualitative content analysis in nursing research:
concepts, procedures and measures to achieve trustworthiness. Nurse Education
Today, 24(2), 105-112. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2003.10.001
Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in Qualitative Research. In N.
K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117).
Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
Hagg-Martinell, A., Hult, H., Henriksson, P., & Kiessling, A. (2014). Students perceive
healthcare as a valuable learning environment when accepted as a part of the
workplace community. Educ Health (Abingdon), 27(1), 15-23. doi: 10.4103/13576283.134296
Hahnel, J., Burdekin H Fau - Anand, S., & Anand, S. (2009). Re-admissions following hip
fracture surgery. (1478-7083 (Electronic)). doi: D - NLM: PMC2966164 EDAT2009/06/30 09:00 MHDA- 2009/12/16 06:00 CRDT- 2009/06/30 09:00 PHST2009/06/25 [aheadofprint] AID - 10619 [pii] AID - 10.1308/003588409X432374
[doi] PST - ppublish
Hallin, K., Henriksson, P., Dalen, N., & Kiessling, A. (2011). Effects of interprofessional
education on patient perceived quality of care. Med Teach, 33(1), e22-26. doi:
10.3109/0142159X.2011.530314
Hallin, K., Kiessling, A., Waldner, A., & Henriksson, P. (2009). Active interprofessional
education in a patient based setting increases perceived collaborative and
professional competence. Med Teach, 31(2), 151-157. doi:
10.1080/01421590802216258
Hammick, M., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., Reeves, S., & Barr, H. (2007). A best evidence
systematic review of interprofessional education: BEME Guide no. 9. Med Teach,
29(8), 735-751. doi: 10.1080/01421590701682576
Hansen, T. B., & Jacobsen, F. (2009). Cost effective interprofessional training an
evaluation of a training unit in Denmark. J Interprof Care, May;23(3), 234-241. doi:
10.1080/13561820802602420
Herbert, C. P. (2005). Changing the culture: interprofessional education for collaborative
patient-centred practice in Canada. J Interprof Care, 19 Suppl 1, 1-4. doi:
10.1080/13561820500081539
Hilton, R., & Morris, J. (2001). Student placements--is there evidence supporting team skill
development in clinical practice settings? J Interprof Care, 15(2), 171-183.
Hylin, U., Nyholm, H., Mattiasson, A. C., & Ponzer, S. (2007). Interprofessional training in
clinical practice on a training ward for healthcare students: a two-year follow-up. J
Interprof Care, 21(3), 277-288. doi: 10.1080/13561820601095800.
Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the
21st Century. Washington (DC): The National Academic Press.
Jacobsen, F., Fink, A. M., Marcussen, V., Larsen, K., & Hansen, T. B. (2009).
Interprofessional undergraduate clinical learning: results from a three year project in
a Danish Interprofessional Training Unit. J Interprof Care, 23(1), 30-40. doi:
10.1080/13561820802490909
Jacobsen, F. Lindqvist, S. (2009). A two-week stay in an Interprofessional Training Unit
changes students' attitudes to health professionals. J Interprof Care, May;23(3),
242-250. doi: 10.1080/13561820902739858.
Jenkinson, C., Coulter, A., Bruster, S., Richards, N., & Chandola, T. (2002). Patients'
experiences and satisfaction with health care: results of a questionnaire study of
specific aspects of care. Qual Saf Health Care, 11(4), 335-339.
Kirkpatrick, DL. (1967). Evaluation of training. In: Craig R, Bittel I, editors. Training and
58
Development Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and
development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. The chapter: The process of
experiential learning. Page 20-38.
Lachmann, H., Ponzer, S., Johansson, U. B., Benson, L., & Karlgren, K. (2013). Capturing
students' learning experiences and academic emotions at an interprofessional
training ward. J Interprof Care, 27(2), 137-145. doi:
10.3109/13561820.2012.724124
Ladyshewsky, R. K. (2006). Building cooperation in peer coaching relationships:
understanding the relationships between reward structure, learner preparedness,
coaching skill and learner engagement. Physiotherapy, 92(1), 4-10. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physio.2005.11.005
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning : legitimate peripheral participation.
Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Li, L. C., Grimshaw, J. M., Nielsen, C., Judd, M., Coyte, P. C., & Graham, I. D. (2009).
Evolution of Wenger's concept of community of practice. Implement Sci, 4, 11. doi:
10.1186/1748-5908-4-11
Lidskog, M., Lofmark, A., & Ahlstrom, G. (2009). Learning through participating on an
interprofessional training ward. J Interprof Care, 23(5), 486-497. doi:
10.1080/13561820902921878
Lindquist, I., Engardt, M., Garnham, L., Poland, F., & Richardson, B. (2006). Development
pathways in learning to be a physiotherapist. Physiother Res Int, 11(3), 129-139.
O’Brien, T., Freemantle, N., Oxman, A.D., Wolf, F., Davis, D.A., Herrin. (2001). Continuing
education meetings and workshops: effects on professional practice and health care
outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(2): CD003030.
Ponzer, S., Hylin, U., Kusoffsky, A., Lauffs, M., Lonka, K., Mattiasson, A. C., &
Nordstrom, G. (2004). Interprofessional training in the context of clinical practice:
goals and students' perceptions on clinical education wards. Med Educ, 38(7), 727736. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2004.01848.x
Quan, H., Couris, C. M., Fushimi, K., Graham, P., Hider, P., Januel, J.-M., .Sundararajan,
V. (2011). Updating and validating the Charlson comorbidity index and score for
risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from 6 countries. (14766256 (Electronic)).
Quan, H., Sundararajan, V., Halfon, P., Fong, A., Burnand, B., Luthi, J. C., . . . Ghali, W.
A. (2005). Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10
administrative data. Med Care, 43(11), 1130-1139.
Rabol, L. I., Andersen, M., Ostergaard, D., Bjorn, B., Lilja, B., Mogensen, T. (2011).
Descriptions of verbal communication errors between staff. An analysis of 84 root
cause analysis-reports from Danish hospitals. (2044-5423 (Electronic)).
Reeves, S., & Freeth, D. (2002). The London training ward: an innovative interprofessional
learning initiative. J Interprof Care, 16(1), 41-52.
Reeves, S., Zwarenstein, M., Goldman, J., Barr, H., Freeth, D., Hammick, M., & Koppel, I.
(2008). Interprofessional education: effects on professional practice and health care
outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(1), CD002213. doi:
10.1002/14651858.CD002213.pub2
Silén, C., Kiessling, A., Spaak, J., Henriksson, P. (2011). The experience of physician
supervisors with clerkship students: a qualitative study. International Journal of
Medical Education. 2011; 2:56-63; DOI: 10.5116/ijme.4e0c.23de
59
Sundararajan, V., Quan, H., Halfon, P., Fushimi, K., Luthi, J. C., Burnand, B., . . .
International Methodology Consortium for Coded Health, I. (2007). Cross-national
comparative performance of three versions of the ICD-10 Charlson index. Med
Care, 45(12), 1210-1215. doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181484347
Thistlethwaite, J. (2012). Interprofessional education: a review of context, learning and the
research agenda. Med Educ, 46(1), 58-70. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.04143.x
Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (1998). Introduction to peer assisted learning Peer-assisted
learning (pp. 1-24). London: Erlbaum.
Wahlstrom, O., Sanden, I., & Hammar, M. (1997). Multiprofessional education in the
medical curriculum. Med Educ, 31(6), 425-429.
Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice : learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Wenger, E., McDermott, R., & Snyder, W. M. (2002). Cultivating communities of practice
: a guide to managing knowledge. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
WHO. (2010). Framework for Action on Interprofessional Education & Collaborative
Practice. from http://www.who.int/hrh/resources/framework_action/en/.
WHO. (1988).Learning together to work together for health. Report of a WHO Study Group
on Multiprofessional Education of Health Personnel: the Team Approach. (1988).
World Health Organ Tech Rep Ser, 769(0512-3054 (Print)), 1-72.
Wilhelmsson, M., Pelling, S., Ludvigsson, J., Hammar, M., Dahlgren, L. O., & Faresjo, T.
(2009). Twenty years experiences of interprofessional education in Linkoping-ground-breaking and sustainable. J Interprof Care, 23(2), 121-133. doi:
10.1080/13561820902728984
Wood, D. A., Kotseva, K., Connolly, S., Jennings, C., Mead, A., Jones, J., . . . Group, E. S.
(2008). Nurse-coordinated multidisciplinary, family-based cardiovascular disease
prevention programme (EUROACTION) for patients with coronary heart disease
and asymptomatic individuals at high risk of cardiovascular disease: a paired,
cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 371(9629), 1999-2012. doi:
10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60868-5 60